Offer & Vasquez- Mireles (2009) report teachers’ beliefs that integration of mathematics and science in schools might strengthen content knowledge, promote flexibility in problem-solving and enhance pupil motivation.  Mathematical ideas play an important role in the explanatory power of models in science and scientific inquiry provides a rich source of tasks in which the utility of mathematical ideas can be made transparent. A rationale for the integration of science and mathematics might consider purpose, utility and benefits for pupils (Ainley et al. 2006). 

The extent to which teachers’ classroom practice is shaped by their individual views of the nature of science and mathematics, and about teaching and the process of learning in both subjects, has been well documented (Abd-El-Khalick & Lederman 2000; Ernest 1989). Additional influences include beliefs about the role of inquiry-based approaches (Harlen and Allende 2009; Marshall et al. 2009), substantive understanding (Roberts et al. 2010) and pedagogical content knowledge in both subjects (Shulman1986; Loughran et al 2004; Rowlands et al 2005).

As part of a large European project the authors drew on research and practice of science and mathematics education, including factors promoting effective inquiry-based approaches in both (Duschl et al. 2007), to develop a framework showing how strands of content from each subject might be brought together through an inquiry approach and which might enhance pupils’ scientific and mathematical practice. This framework provided the basis for pairs of teachers, in twelve schools in England, to work together to begin to integrate science and mathematics teaching through an inquiry-based approach at primary and lower secondary level.

Drawing on research and practice within mathematics and science education a framework, was developed by the authors showing how strands of content from each subject might be brought together through an inquiry approach. Sequences of activities, based on the framework, provided for the teachers in professional development sessions adopted a constructivist approach.  Teachers worked through carefully designed sequences of activities modelling inquiry processes. They then selected and trialled activities in their own classes. Each teacher had either mathematics or science expertise, or interest, which might facilitate collaboration and the development of innovative practice in school.

This paper addresses two key questions:

1. How do the teachers explain changes made to their practice?

2. What insights are gained to the teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge from the changes to their practice?

Abd-El-Khalick, F., Lederman, N. G.(2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665–701. Ainley J., Pratt, D. & Hansen, A. (2006). Connecting engagement and focus in pedagogic task design. British Educational Research Journal, 32, 23-38. Clarke, D. & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 947–967. Duschl,R., Schweingruber,H. and Shouse,A. (Eds.)(2007) Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K–8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Ernest , P.(1989)‘The Impact of Beliefs on the Teaching of Mathematics’, in P. Ernest, Ed. Mathematics Teaching: The State of the Art, London, Falmer Press Guskey,,T.R.(1988) Teacher efficacy, self- concept and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(1)65-69 Jarvis, T., Pell, A. and Hingley, P.(2011) Variations in primary teachers’ responses during three major science in- service programmes. Center for Education Policy Studies Journal; 1,(1),67-92 Harlen W. and Allende J.(2009),Report of the working group on teacher professional development in pre-secondary inquiry-based science education(IBSE). Interacademy Panel on International Issues. Downloaded from www.interacademies.net/CMS/Programmes/3123.aspx Loughran, J., Mullhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370–391. Marshall, J.C., Horton, R., Igo, B.L. and Switzer, D.M. (2009) K-12 Science and Mathematics Teachers’ Beliefs about and use of Inquiry in the Classroom. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 7, 575-596 Miles, M. & Huberman, M.(1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook Thousand Oaks, Calif., Sage. Offer, J. & Vasquez Mireles, S. (2009) Mix it up: Teachers’ Beliefs on Mixing mathematics and Science. School Science and Mathematics 109 (3), 146 – 152 Roberts, R., Gott, R. and Glaesser, R. (2010) Students’ approaches to open-ended science investigation: the importance of substantive and procedural understanding. Research Papers in Education. 25(4), 377-407 Rowland, T., Huckstep, P.& Thwaites, A. (2005) Elementary teachers’ mathematics subject knowledge: the knowledge quartet and the case of Naomi, Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education Shulman, L.S. (1986) Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. Stake, R. (1995) The art of case study research (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage). Yin, R. (1994) Case study research: design and methods (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage).