Comparison of Science Teaching Perception of Preservice Elementary Education Teachers’ and Preservice Elementary Science Education Teachers

Author(s):

Esra Yardimci(presenting / submitting)Duygu Metin Gulsen Leblebicioglu

Conference:

ECER 2013

Network:

11. Educational Improvement and Quality Assurance

Format:

Paper

Session Information

11 SES 12 B, Teaching Professionalism and Inspection of Education

Paper Session

Time:

2013-09-13

09:00-10:30

Room:

D-311

Chair:

Andra Fernate

Contribution

In Turkey, elementary science teaching as a specific course starts at 4^th grade of elementary education and continues till 9^th grade. Elementary science teaching at 4^th and 5^th grades was conducted by elementary education teachers. These teachers teach almost all subjects as well as science to a single class at 1^st to 5^th grades. On the other hand, there are subject-specific teachers at the following grades. Elementary science education teachers teach only elementary science courses at 6^th, 7^th, and 8^th grade to different classes. Teacher education programs for pre-service elementary education teachers and pre-service elementary science education teachers are also different. There are varieties of courses in Elementary Teacher Education Program, but there are two science courses, two elementary science laboratories, and two elementary science teaching methods course. On the other hand, there are more science and science teaching courses in Elementary Science Teacher Education Program.

Depending on the differences in two teacher education programs, it is important to follow both kind of pre-service teachers’ conception of science teaching, because both will affect their science teaching beliefs. Science teaching at 4^th and 5^th grades is as important as science teaching at 6^th-8^th grades, because it establishes the background knowledge and basic science process skills.

In this study, it was investigated that how changes pre-service elementary teachers and pre-service elementary science education teachers’ science teaching style. Also, it was wondered about if gender is influential or not on science teaching conception. Pre-service teachers were simply asked to draw themselves at work while teaching science. For this purposes, Draw a Science Teacher Test (DASTT) was applied. DASTT is an adapted version of Draw a Scientist Test (DAST) (Chambers, 1983). DASTT-C scores were categorized as exploratory (0-4), conceptual (5-9), and explicit and didactic (10-13) (Thomas, Pederson, & Finson, 2001).

DASTT-C was successfully used in other studies (Al-Amoush, Abu-Hola, & Eilks, 2011; Elmas, Demirdogen, & Geban, 2011; Ucar, 2011; Minogue, 2010; Finson, Thomas, & Pederson, 2006). Some of these studies found out that elementary science teachers were in conceptual range between teacher- centered and student-centered teaching (Finson, Thomas, & Pederson, 2006; Al-Amoush, Abu-Hola, & Eilks, 2011).

DASTT-C was also used in a few studies in Turkey. In a study conducted with 213 pre-service teachers in three different universities in Turkey showed that 41% of the elementary science teachers indicated teacher-centered science teaching or 39% were in conceptual range, but student-centered science teaching was least (20%). The resulted total mean score in this study was 7.47 falls in conceptual range (Turkmen, 2008). Similar results were reported by Elmas, Demirdogen, & Geban (2011) who reported a mean of 7.65 which was again in the conceptual range. On the other hand, Ucar (2011) reported better results (4.32, 5.38, 5.13, 4.00 for 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd, and 4^th year students) which were close to student-centered science teaching range.

In this context, it was investigated that pre-service elementary teachers and pre-service elementary science education teachers’ science teaching style and if gender is influential or not on science teaching conception.

Method

In this study, third year pre-service teachers’ conceptions of science teaching in both teacher education programs were compared. In order to investigate their conceptions of science teaching, Draw a Science Teacher Test (DASTT) was applied. DASTT is an adapted version of Draw a Scientist Test (DAST) (Chambers, 1983). In order to sustain a reliable analysis of the drawings and produce quantifiable scores, Thomas, Pederson, & Finson (2001) developed a checklist (DASTT-C). The study was conducted in science teaching methods courses as one measure at the beginning of these courses at Abant Izzet Baysal University in Turkey. Pre-service elementary education teachers (55) and pre-service elementary science education teachers (54) were instructed to draw themselves as a science teacher at work. Their drawings were analyzed by applying DASTT-C check-list which consists of 13 characteristics in three sections (teacher, students, and environment) and scored as 1 for the existence or 0 for the absence of each characteristic. DASTT-C scores were categorized as exploratory (0-4), conceptual (5-9), and explicit and didactic (10-13) (Thomas, Pederson, & Finson, 2001). Since the data were dichotomous (1 or zero for existence and absence), a non-parametric statistical test for independent samples, Mann-Whitney U was applied.

Expected Outcomes

The mean for DASTT-C scores in pre-service elementary education teachers was 7.42 (SD=2.65) and for pre-service elementary science education teachers was 7.33 (SD=2.88). Both means were in the conceptual range which indicates that a science teaching perception which was in between teacher-centered and student-centered science teaching in our data. The comparison of both groups with Mann-Whitney U-test resulted with no statistically significant difference. Also, there was no statistical significant difference between male and female pre-service teachers’ science teaching perception. In pre-service elementary education teachers, 25.5% was in explicit-didactic category, 58.2% was in conceptual category, and 16.4% was in exploratory category with more detailed description. On the other hand, in pre-service elementary science education teachers, 27.8% was in explicit-didactic category, 50% was in conceptual category, and 22.2% was in exploratory category. The results revealed that pre-service teachers in both groups were close to student-centered teaching, but do not yet have this science teaching style. These results showed that regardless of type of pre-service teachers, there is any statistical difference between pre-service teachers for this small group. But results could be different with different participants. We should consider our students’ background and conceptions of science teaching as science educators for future generations.

References

Al-Amoush, S.A., Abu-Hola, I., & Eilks, I. (2011) Jordanian prospective and experienced chemistry teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning and their potential role for educational reform. Science Education International, 22(3), 185-201. Chambers, D. W. (1983). Stereotypical images of the scientist: The Draw-Scientist Test. Science Education, 67(2), 255-265. Elmas, R., Demirdogen, B., Geban, O. (2011) Pre-service Chemistry Teachers’ Images of About Science Teaching in Their Future Classrooms. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 40, 164-175. Finson, K.D., Thomas, J., & Pederson, J. (2006) Comparing Science Teaching Styles to Students’ Perceptions of Scientists. School Science and Mathematics, 106 (1), 8-15. Minogue, J. (2010) What is the Teacher Doing? What are the Students Doing? An Application of the Draw-a-Science-Teacher-Test. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 767-781. Thomas, J. A., Pedersen, J. E., and Finson, K. (2001) Validating the Draw-A-Science-Teacher-Test Checklist (DASTT-C): Exploring Mental Models and Teacher Beliefs, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 295-310. Turkmen, H. (2008) Turkish primary students’ perceptions about scientist and what factors affecting the image of the scientists. Eurasia Journal of Mathemathics, Science & Technology Education, 4(1):55–61. Ucar, S. (2011) How Do Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Views on Science, Scientists, and Science Teaching Change Over Time in a Science Teacher Training Program? Journal of Science Education and Technology. DOI: 10.1007/s10956-011-9311-6.

Author Information

Esra Yardimci (presenting / submitting)

Abant Izzet Baysal University

Elementary Science Education

Bolu

Duygu Metin

Abant Izzet Baysal University, Turkey

Gulsen Leblebicioglu