Standards for the Education of Teachers of Science: Skills of Teaching*

The program prepares candidates to create a community of diverse student learners who can construct meaning from science experiences and possess a disposition for further inquiry and learning. Pedagogy refers to:

• Science teaching actions, strategies and methodologies.
• Interactions with students that promote learning and achievement.
• Effective organization of classroom experiences.
• Use of advanced technology to extend and enhance learning.
• Use of prior conceptions and student interests to promote new learning.

5.1 Examples of Indicators
 

5.2 Rationale and Discussion

Science teachers and specialists should give all students opportunities to learn from instruction and make sense of science as a way of knowing. They should encourage students to want to do more science. This standard is grounded on assumptions that all students can learn science at some level (AAAS, 1989; NRC, 1996) and that teachers are creative decision-makers who do not just mechanically direct preset activities (Orlich et al., 1998; BSCS, 1995). Furthermore, teachers have a responsibility to continually change their practices to help students learn more effectively. Learning is a process of making sense of experiences rather than memorizing information. It requires integration of thoughts, feelings, and actions (Novak, 1984). Meaning is constructed by adding, deleting, and modifying information in an existing idiosyncratic conceptual framework (Spector, 1995; Novak, 1984).

Many factors shape a person's conceptual framework, including life experiences; social, emotional, and cognitive developmental stages (APA, 1992); inherent intelligences (Gardner, 1985); learning styles (Curry, 1990); race and gender (Lynn & Hyde, 1989); ethnicity and culture (Banks, 1993); and demographic setting (Orlich, et al., 1998). Teachers must be aware of the influence of these factors--real or potential--on student behaviors and abilities if they are to design effective learning opportunities.

In general, a learning opportunity targeting a particular concept should involve students in multiple interactions with events or objects representing various attributes of the concept. Novak (1984) defines a concept as a perceived regularity in objects or events, or records of objects or events, designated by a concept label. Understanding a concept is a matter of perceiving the regularity and relating it to other regularities.

Current thinking in education conceives of meaningful knowledge as a coherent network of concepts from which one can make cogent decisions, rather than a collection of relatively disconnected concepts and facts. To build these networks, teachers must provide learning opportunities requiring multiple interactions with appropriate objects or events. The more students encounter and make sense of objects or events that contain a regularity--the concept--the more likely they are to incorporate the concept meaningfully into their world view. Multiple encounters give students opportunities to connect concepts and construct valid propositions and data-based theories (Spector, 1991). It follows, then, that an effective science teacher should have a repertoire of classroom, laboratory and field activities that are appropriate for the development of the major concepts of science by students at a given level.

Pedagogy, however, is not just concerned with development of conceptual knowledge. An important part of science education is to teach students the social processes of consensus building and engage them in the social construction of meaning (Zeidler, 1997). In other words science education, like education in all fields, should encourage students to think about thinking, facilitate creativity and critical judgement, and favor development of self-awareness (APA, 1992; Zeidler, Lederman & Taylor, 1992).

Methodologies for science teaching are abundant. Cooperative learning models, concept mapping, model building, role playing, games, simulations, analyzing case studies, questioning strategies, problem solving, inquiry strategies, field trips (on and off campus), research projects, electronic media presentations, reading, authentic assessment and reflective self evaluation are examples.

The use of computer games, simulations and processing programs may be particularly productive because they allow students to obtain, process, and transform data readily, and to compare multiple perspectives and interpretations of the data. By increasing the speed, ease, variety, and efficacy of learner engagements, teachers can make room for more for the hands-on/minds-on experiences so critical for engaging underrepresented and underserved students in the study of science (Gardner, Mason & Matyas, 1989; Kahle, 1983).

Experienced teachers must be able to exercise the professional judgement needed to match learning opportunities to a variety of existing conceptual frameworks and learning styles. They must provide learning opportunities which are flexible, diverse, challenging and accessible (APA, 1992) which, taken together, stimulate students' curiosity about the world around them. A teacher who offers diverse learning opportunities makes it more likely that each student will learn science at some level. Since sequencing of activities has been shown to be a factor in their effectiveness, teachers should be proficient in using available instructional models such as the learning cycle (Karplus, et al., 1977; BSCS, 1993; Bybee et al., 1989) or other demonstrably effective constructivist models.

Throughout their careers, effective teachers use student responses (Danielson, 1996) and new knowledge in the field to improve their practices. As professionals, science teachers should engage in continuous self-study, demonstrating improvements in their selection of strategies and methods over time, and justifying their professional choices by referring to research on learning, assessments of student outcomes, state and national goals for science education, and available resources.

The stages of concern (Fuller, 1969; Reeves & Kazelskis, 1985) of teachers must be considered in assessing their professional development. Most teachers begin their careers with a limited repertoire of knowledge and skills, and place high priority on day-to-day survival. Over time, with confidence, this self-centeredness usually yields to a greater concern for the needs and welfare of the students. In keeping with this, the teacher's ability to explain a given instructional decision should increase over time, demonstrating the ability to identify specific solutions to specific problems consistent with the interests and needs of the students.

5.3 Recommendations of the National Science Teachers Association

In most teacher education programs, skills of teaching are the responsibility of the education unit. While generic methods preparation for teachers across fields can lay the groundwork for further learning, NSTA regards specific preparation in science methods as essential for science teachers and specialists, and also elementary generalists.

In order to promote the pedagogy of inquiry, teacher preparation programs should maximize opportunities for active learning and inquiry in content science courses, consistent with the goal of the courses. Teachers who are comfortable with active, as opposed to passive, learning can be presumed to be more likely to use active learning in their own classrooms. Science teaching candidates should prove the ability to effectively use a variety of hands-on/ minds-on instructional activities appropriate for the discipline(s) and the level(s) they are preparing to teach, both in the classroom and in the field. They should be able to discuss the impact of sequencing on the effectiveness of instruction and use constructivist methodologies such as learning cycles to enhance student learning. The ability to effectively use appropriate and varied technology is essential.

Programs should give candidates ample opportunities to engage in instruction, both individually and as members of a teaching team. Prospective teachers should be provided with methods to assess the needs of classes and individual students, and should show an ability to choose from among a variety of activities and strategies to meet those needs. Candidates should exhibit dispositions allowing them to work effectively with students from a variety of racial, ethnic, religious and social backgrounds and should articulate rationales for their actions reflecting concern for responsible educational practice.

The best programs for science teacher preparation have a well defined set of indicators for effective pedagogy and provide students with multiple ways to display science teaching competencies in authentic settings. Work with K-12 students is a significant feature of the program. Indicators of pedagogy are consistent with best practices as defined in the science education literature and are each based on a solid, well-articulated rationale. Programs provide sufficient time, number and arrangement of experiences to ensure that candidates acquire the desired competencies. The best programs use a variety of contemporary assessment measures to measure performance in the most authentic and diverse settings available. They ensure that candidates work with students with varied abilities from different backgrounds and adjust their practices to meet different needs.

 5.4 References

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington DC: Author.

American Psychological Association, Task Force on Psychology in Education. (1992). Learner-centered psychological principles: Guidelines for school redesign and reform. Washington DC: Author.

American Psychological Association, Work Group of the APA Board of Educational Affairs. (1995, Dec.). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school redesign and reform (revised). Washington DC: Author.

Banks, J. (1993). The canon debate, knowledge construction, and multicultural education. Educational Researcher, 22(5), 4-14.

Bybee, R., Buchwald, C. E., Crissman, S., Heil, D., Kuerbis, P., Matsumoto, C. & McInerney W. (1989). Science and technology education for elementary years: Frameworks for curriculum and instruction. Washington DC: The National Center for Improving Science Education.

Biological Sciences Curriculum Study. (1995). Decisions in teaching elementary school science (2^nd ed.). Colorado Springs CO: Author.

Biological Sciences Curriculum Study. (1993) Science for life and living: Integrating science, technology and health - Implementation guide. Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.

Curry, L. (1990). Learning styles in secondary schools: A review of instruments and implications for their use. Madison WI: National Center on Effective Secondary Schools.

Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Arlington VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Gardner, A. L., Mason, C. L. & Matyas, M. L. (1989). Equity, excellence & 'just plain good teaching. The American Biology Teacher, 51(2), 72-77.

Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 207-226.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York NY: Basic Books.

Kahle, J. (1983). Factors affecting the retention of girls in science courses and careers: Case studies of selected secondary schools. Study conducted for the National Science Board Commission on Pre-College Education in Mathematics, Science & Technology by the National Association of Biology Teachers, Reston VA.

Karplus, R., Lawson, A., Wollman, W., Appel, M., Bernoff, R., Howe, A., Rusch, J. & Sullivan, F. (1977). Science teaching and the development of reasoning: A workshop. Berkeley CA: University of California.

National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Novak, J. (1993). How do we learn our lesson? The Science Teacher, 60(3), 51-55.

Novak, J. & Gowin, B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York NY: Cambridge University Press.

Orlich, D., Harder, R., Callahan, R. & Gibson, H. (1998). Teaching strategies: A guide to better instruction (5^th ed). Boston MA: Houghton-Mifflin.

Reeves, C. K. & Kazelskis, R. (1985). Concerns of preservice and inservice teachers. Journal of Educational Research, 78, 267-271.

Spector, B. (1995). Inventing technology education: Insights for change from a science educator's perspective. Tampa FL: University of South Florida Adult and Vocational Education Department.

Spector, B. & Gibson, C. (1991). A qualitative study of middle school students' perceptions of factors facilitating the learning of science: Grounded theory and existing theory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(6), 467-484.

Zeidler, D. L., Lederman, N. G. & Taylor, S. C. (1992). Fallacies and student discourse: Conceptualizing the role of critical thinking in science education. Science Education, 76(4), 437-450.

Zeidler, D. L. (1997). The central role of fallacious thinking in science education. Science Education, 81(3), 483-496.