Standards for the Education of Teachers of Science: Content

The program prepares candidates to structure and interpret the concepts, ideas and relationships in science that are needed to advance student learning in the area of licensure as defined by state and national standards developed by the science education community. Content refers to:

• Concepts and principles understood through science.
• Concepts and relationships unifying science domains.
• Processes of investigation in a science discipline.
• Applications of mathematics in science research.

1.1 Examples of Indicators
 

1.2 Rationale and Discussion

Knowledge is a conceptual model through which the individual makes sense of the world (Sternberg, 1985). Shulman (1986) identifies three dimensions of professional knowledge important to the teacher: content, or subject matter knowledge; pedagogical content knowledge; and curricular knowledge. Content knowledge as defined in this standard consists of the concepts and relationships constructed through professional investigations in the natural sciences, and the processes of scientific investigation.

Constructivism emerged from the realization that pre-existing knowledge influences the way new knowledge is added to the individual's conceptual model, modifying its subsequent meaning (Stahl, 1991). Educators increasingly understand that private knowledge - the true conceptual framework of the individual - may differ considerably from the public knowledge of science. Therefore the goals of formal education have shifted from the relatively straightforward process of transmitting information to the more complex task of facilitating development of a meaningful conceptual framework (Brophy, 1992).

Because young children have less extensive personal models than adults, integration of new knowledge is generally improved when learning is concrete. As children mature, they develop a greater ability to operate in the abstract. However, there is considerable evidence to indicate that concrete learning is present well into the high school years, and possibly into adulthood (Renner, Grant and Sutherland, 1978). The use of models, metaphors and analogies by scientists to concretize new knowledge has been amply demonstrated by Dreistadt (1968) and Leatherdale (1974). The need to relate new knowledge to familiar, and even personal, referents seems inherent in meaningful and creative learning.

These findings have implications for the preparation of science teachers. In science teaching, both at the K-12 and university levels, instructors rely heavily upon the abstract teaching methods of lecture and textbook readings supplemented by verification activities and laboratory demonstrations (Boyer, 1987; Dunkin and Barnes, 1986; Smith and Anderson, 1984). As a result, many students, at all levels, learn science superficially. Stepans et al. (1986) found that although older students can use more science terms than younger students, they may decline in their understanding of fundamental concepts. It appears that new knowledge, if poorly integrated, may actually be counterproductive. Lederman, Gess-Newsome and Latz (1994) found the secondary science teacher candidates they studied lacked a unified, stable knowledge structure in their fields. Mason (1992) found that senior and graduate-level biology majors were often unable to link concepts accurately when asked to make concept maps in their field. These findings have been supported by many other researchers studying students and beginning teachers in science.

Part of the problem appears to stem from a poor match between learner needs and teaching methodology, especially in the preparation of elementary teachers. Stalheim-Smith and Scharmann (1996) and Stoddart et al. (1993) found that the use of constructivist teaching methodologies and learning cycles--methods often emphasizing concrete learning--can improve the learning of science by candidates in elementary education. A second major problem in many courses taught traditionally is their emphasis on rapidly learning large amounts of unintegrated factual information. Major concepts are poorly delineated from less important concepts, and few concepts are learned in depth. This is in contrast with an approach in which fewer, well-selected integrating concepts are carefully linked to form a framework for further learning. A third problem lies in the division of knowledge, for convenience, into disciplines and fields. Such divisions may constrain the development of linkages among concepts across fields and so inhibit the development of an integrated cognitive model.

Ball and McDiarmid (1991) point out that the outcomes of subject matter learning go beyond the substantive knowledge of the subject usually regarded as content knowledge. Students also develop an image of the subject that frames their dispositions toward it, in keeping with the well-known adage that the medium is the message. Depth of preparation in various areas of content knowledge influences both what the teacher chooses to teach and how he or she chooses to teach it (Carlsen, 1991). In addition, experienced teachers have been shown to differ from scientists in the way they perceive knowledge in the natural sciences, being more likely to interpret its meaning from the perspective of teaching and learning. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that institutions could better prepare teachers by considering the specific needs and interests of teachers when designing their teacher preparation programs.

Many studies, including a 1983 meta-analysis by Druva and Anderson (65 studies), show weak but positive relationships between student achievement in science and the background of the teacher in both science and education coursework (Anderson and Mitchner, 1994). Ferguson and Womack (1993) found in a three-year study that course work in teacher education was a more powerful predictor of teacher effectiveness than measures of content expertise alone. Darling-Hammond (1991) cites several studies demonstrating that teachers admitted to the profession through quick-entry alternative routes had difficulty with pedagogical content knowledge and curriculum development. She also cites several studies supporting the efficacy of subject-specific methods courses for those preparing to teach. Content courses directed toward meeting the specific needs of teachers which are cognizant of their interests and learning styles appear from the literature to be more productive than courses taught traditionally. Such courses usually reflect a constructivist philosophy, focusing on the development of a deeper knowledge of fewer concepts and principles than traditional courses (Hewson and Hewson, 1988).

The development of a clear, consistent integrating framework for science across disciplines is a stated national goal of science education. The National Science Education Standards (National Research Council, 1996), for example, outline a framework of unifying concepts and processes (themes) that underlies its model of knowledge in the natural sciences. These themes include: (a) systems, order and organization; (b) evidence, models and explanation; (c) constancy, change and measurement; (d) evolution and equilibrium; and (e) form and function. As an example of how these themes integrate subjects, consider how the theme of evolution and equilibrium unifies the concepts of equilibrium in chemistry, homeostasis in biology, geochemical processes in earth science, and thermodynamics in physics. In a similar vein the theme systems, order and organization can, for example, unify concepts related to classification and the organization of knowledge in all disciplines. Other major concepts unify studies within more limited fields of study. For example, in biology, concepts such as adaptation, evolution, and community are important unifying themes.

The practice of separating subject matter content from the actions or processes from which it evolves has also been a concern of teacher educators. Many university science programs appear to regard laboratory experiences as ancillary to lecture, useful primarily to validate knowledge delivered by lecture and reading. Teachers who learn science didactically and abstractly cannot be expected to teach children constructively and concretely. Teachers who have never conducted investigations and research are unlikely to model investigative behaviors for their students. Individuals preparing to be teachers should have significant and substantial involvement in laboratory, including active inquiry research that goes beyond traditional validation activities. Investigative projects should require formulation of research questions, development of procedures, implementation, collection and processing of data, and the reporting and defense of results.

Standards of the science education community have generally recognized the need for teachers of science to be competent in mathematics. The preparation required varies across science fields, but generally should be no less for teachers than for others in the field with different career goals. Present NSTA standards recommend at least precalculus for majors in biology, earth/space science and general science, calculus for chemistry and physical sciences, and calculus with differential equations for physics teachers (NSTA, 1996). Direct preparation in basic statistics is also recommended, since the increased emphasis on teaching the processes of science to students entails the ability to lead them in data analysis and interpretation.

1.3 Recommendations of the National Science Teachers Association

The content knowledge of the prospective science teacher is developed primarily in science courses taught by science faculty. Assigning the development of the skills and knowledge required by this standard to one or even several science methods courses is unlikely to produce the depth of understanding needed for effective teaching practice. All science teacher candidates should be provided with a carefully designed, balanced content curriculum leading to a demonstrated knowledge of the concepts and relationships they are preparing to teach.

NSTA believes science content should be specifically selected to meet the needs of the prospective teacher. The rationale for the selection of courses should be clear and justified by contemporary professional goals and practices. It should fit within a state or national framework for science instruction that is consistent with national goals and effective practice as reflected in the science education literature. The general expectations of the NSTA for scope of preparation are as follows:

• • For preparation of elementary and middle-level science specialists, conceptual content should be balanced among life, earth/space, physical and environmental sciences, including natural resources.
  • Preparation for teaching secondary biology should minimally include thematic concepts and applications of botany, zoology, ecology, physiology, evolution, genetics, cell biology, microbiology, biochemistry and human biology.
  • Preparation for teaching secondary chemistry should minimally include thematic concepts and major concepts and applications of inorganic, organic, analytical, and physical chemistry and biochemistry.
  • Preparation for teaching secondary earth/space sciences should minimally include thematic concepts and applications in astronomy, geology, meteorology, oceanography and natural resources.
  • Preparation for teaching secondary physics should minimally include thematic concepts and major concepts of mechanics, electricity, magnetism, thermodynamics, waves, optics, atomic and nuclear physics, radioactivity, relativity and quantum mechanics.
  • Preparation for teaching in a composite secondary teaching field (general science, physical science) should be carefully designed to include major and thematic concepts identified for the fields included in the composite and the major concepts of the fields as defined above.
  • Dual field and broad field preparation programs should ensure adequate scope and knowledge of major concepts across fields unified by thematic concepts. This may require considerable attention to designing courses that are synergistic in developing understanding across fields. Dual field and broad field programs may require more credits in science to achieve the desirable depth if generic science courses make up the program.

To the greatest extent possible, science content should be taught in the context of investigation. Opportunities should be provided for all science teacher candidates to participate in a range of laboratory and field investigations, and to complete one or more projects in which they design and carry out open-ended, inquiry research and report the results. The level of sophistication required may vary with the level of preparation of the candidate and his/her field of licensure. If a candidate is preparing to teach in more than one field, inquiry experiences should be required in all fields, but a research project may only be feasible in one field.

Prospective teachers should be provided with instruction that facilitates the identification and development of concepts that unify the traditional science disciplines. Candidates in one discipline should be able to relate its content to relevant content in other disciplines. The basic themes presented in the National Science Education Standards are highly recommended as organizing concepts. Specific learning opportunities and instruction should be included in the program to develop these interrelationships on a personal and professional level.

Science content should be taught in relation to mathematical applications, particularly in relation to data processing, statistical analysis and interpretation. Effective inquiry depends upon these processes and teachers should be able to analyze data from a variety of sources. For science majors, mathematical competence for the teaching option should be equal to that of any other option. In dual field or broad field programs, mathematical competence should equal that of the most mathematically demanding science field.

In the best science teacher preparation programs, content is integrated with pedagogy and includes considerable laboratory instruction, including inquiry. There is a clear justified rationale for selection of content based on a careful analysis the needs of practicing teachers and the state and national science education standards. These programs integrate science instruction across fields and prepare candidates with a broad unified science background, in addition to specific preparation. In the best programs, science instruction includes deliberately planned linkages among related concepts in chemistry, physics, biology and the earth/space sciences. Experiences with the analysis and interpretation of data are regularly provided in content courses, as are opportunities for engaging in conceptual development through open-ended inquiry and research in the context of science (rather than science education). The best programs develop a variety of science-related skills, engaging students in active science learning in a variety of contexts. Candidates from these programs have a demonstrably strong conceptual framework in science grounded in experience, are confident in conducting research and inquiry, and can collect and interpret data meaningfully.

1.4 References

Anderson, R. D. & Mitchner, C. P. (1994) Research on science teacher education. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 3-44). New York NY: Macmillan.

Ball, D. L. & McDiarmid, G. W. (1991). The subject-matter preparation of teachers. In National Research Council, Moving beyond myths; Revitalizing undergraduate mathematics (pp. 437-447). Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Brophy, J. (1992). Probing the subtleties of subject-matter teaching. Educational Leadership, 49(7), 4-8.

Boyer, E. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. New York: Harper and Row.

Carlsen, W. S. (1991). Effects of new biology teachers' subject-matter knowledge on curricular planning. Science Education, 75(6), 631-47.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1991). Are our teachers ready to teach? Quality Teaching, 1(1), 6-7,10.

Dreistadt, R. (1968). An analysis of the use of analogies and metaphors in science. Journal of Psychology, 68(1), 97-116.

Dunkin, M. J. & Barnes, J. (1986). Research on teaching in higher education. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3^rd ed., pp. 754-777). New York: McMillan.

Ferguson, P. & Womack, S. T. (1993). The impact of subject matter and education coursework on teaching performance. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 55-63.

Hewson, P. W. & Hewson, M. G., (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72, 597-614.

Leatherdale, W. H. (1974). The role of analogy, model and metaphor in science. New York NY: Elsevier.

Lederman, N. G., Gess-Newsome, J. & Latz, M. S. (1994). The nature and development of preservice science teachers' conceptions of subject matter and pedagogy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(3), 129-146.

Mason, C. (1992). Concept mapping: A tool to develop reflective science instruction. Science Education, 76, 51-63.

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

Renner, J. W., Grant, R. M. and Sutherland, J. (1978). Content and concrete thought. Science Education, 62(2), 215-221.

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.

Smith, E. L. & Anderson, C. W. (1984). The planning and teaching intermediate science study: Final report (Research series no. 147). Michigan State University, East Lansing MI: Institute for Research on Teaching.

Stahl, R. J. (1991, April). The information-constructivist perspective: Application to and implications for science education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Geneva, WI.

Stalheim-Smith, A. & Scharmann, L. C. (1996). General biology: Creating a positive learning environment for elementary education majors. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7(3), 169-178.

Stepans, J. I., Beiswenger, R. E. & Dyche, S. (1986). Misconceptions die hard. The Science Teacher, 53(9), 65-69.

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Human intelligence: The model is the message. Science, 230(4730), 1111-1118.

Stoddart, T., Connell, M., Stofflett, R. & Peck, D. (1993). Reconstructing elementary teacher candidates understanding of mathematics and science content. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(3), 229-241.