Changes in Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy: From Science Methods to Student Teaching

The purpose of this research was to assess preservice teachers self-efficacy at different stages of their educational career in an attempt to determine the extent to which self-efficacy beliefs may change over time. In addition, the critical incidents, which may contribute to changes in self-efficacy, were also investigated. The instrument used in the study was the Teaching Science as Inquiry (TSI) Instrument. The TSI Instrument was administered to 38 preservice elementary teachers to measure the self-efficacy beliefs of the teacher participants in regard to the teaching of science as inquiry. Based on the results and the associated data analysis, mean and median values demonstrate positive change for self-efficacy and outcome expectancy throughout the data collection period.

How can preservice teachers be measured against advocated professional teaching standards?

Australia has had many inquiries into teaching and teacher education over the last decade. Standards for teaching have been produced by national education systems with many state systems following suit. The Queensland College of Teachers (QCT) advocates ten professional teaching standards for teachers and preservice teachers. How can preservice teachers be measured against advocated professional standards? This study investigated 106 second-year preservice teachers’ perceptions of their development against the QCT standards. A pretest-posttest survey instrument was developed based on the QCT standards and administered to these preservice teachers before and after their science education coursework. Percentages, ANOVAs and t-tests were generated to analyse the results. Findings indicated that 22 of the 24 paired pretest-posttest items were highly significant (p<.001). Percentage increases ranged from as low as 27% in the pretest to as high as 97% in the posttest, yet, there were two items with lower significance (i.e., working in professional science education teams and supporting students’ participation in society). Understanding preservice teachers’ perceptions of their abilities to implement these standards may be a step towards the process of determining the achievement of teaching standards; however, more rigorous measurements will need to be developed for both teachers and preservice teachers. University coursework and related assessments can provide an indication of achieving these standards, especially authentic assessment of preservice teachers’ practices.

Understanding preservice teachers’ predispositions for teaching engineering education in Australian schools.

Engineering education is underrepresented in Australia at the primary, middle school and high school levels. Understanding preservice teachers’ preparedness to be involved in engineering will be important for developing an engineering curriculum. This study administered a literature-based survey to 36 preservice teachers, which gathered data about their perceptions of engineering and their predispositions for teaching engineering. Findings indicated that the four constructs associated with the survey had acceptable Cronbach alpha scores (i.e., personal professional attributes .88, student motivation .91, pedagogical knowledge .91, and fused curricula .89). However, there was no “disagree” or “strongly disagree” response greater than 22% for any of the 25 survey items. Generally, these preservice teachers indicated predispositions for teaching engineering in the middle school. Extensive scaffolding and support with education programs will assist preservice teachers to develop confidence in this field. Governments and education departments need to recognise the importance of engineering education, and universities must take a stronger role in developing engineering education curricula.

Employing the five-factor mentoring instrument : analysing mentoring practices for teaching primary science.

Primary science education is a concern around the world and quality mentoring within schools can develop preservice teachers’ practices. A five-factor model for mentoring has been identified, namely, personal attributes, system requirements, pedagogical knowledge, modelling, and feedback. Final-year preservice teachers (mentees, n=211) from three Turkish universities were administered a previously validated instrument to gather perceptions of their mentoring in primary science teaching. ANOVA indicated that each of these five factors was statistically significant (p<.001) with mean scale scores ranging from 3.36 to 4.12. Although mentees perceived their mentors to provide evaluation feedback (95%), model classroom management (88%), guide their preparation (96%), and outline the science curriculum (92%), the majority of mentors were perceived not to assist their mentees in 10 of the 34 survey items. Professional development programmes that target the specific needs of these mentors may further enhance mentoring practices for advancing primary science teaching.

Analysing preservice teachers' potential for implementing engineering education in the middle school

Engineering is pivotal to any country's development. Yet there are insufficient engineers to take up available positions in many countries, including Australia (Engineers Australia, 2008). Engineering education is limited in Australia at the primary, middle and high school levels. One of the starting points for addressing this shortfall lies in preservice teacher education. This study explores second-year preservice teachers' potential to teach engineering in middle school, following their engagement with engineering concepts in their science curriculum unit and their teaching of engineering activities to Year 7 students. Using a literature-based pretest-posttest survey, items were categorised into four constructs (ie. personal professional attributes, student motivation, pedagogical knowledge and fused curricula). Results indicated that the preservice teachers' responses had not changed for instilling positive attitudes (88%) and accepting advice from colleagues (94%). However, there was statistical significance with 9 of the 25 survey items (p<0.05) after the preservice teachers' involvement in engineering activities. Fusing engineering education with other subjects, such as mathematics and science, is an essential first step in promoting preservice teachers' potential to implement engineering education in the middle school.

ePortfolios and preservice teachers : governing at a distance through non-human actors

This chapter seeks to develop an analysis of the contemporary use of the ePortfolio (Electronic Portfolio) in education practices. Unlike other explorations of this new technology which are deterministic in their approach, the authors seek to reveal the techniques and practices of government which underpin the implementation of the e-portfolio. By interrogating a specific case study example from a large Australian university’s preservice teacher program, the authors find that the e-portfolio is represented as eLearning technology but serves to govern students via autonomization and self responsibilization. Using policy data and other key documents, they are able to reveal the e-portfolio as a delegated authority in the governance of preservice teachers. However, despite this ongoing trend, they suggest that like other practices of government, the e-portfolio will eventually fail. This however the authors conclude opens up space for critical thought and engagement which is not afforded presently.

Educating EFL preservice teachers for teaching astronomy

Malaysia’s Vision 2020 for enhancing its education system includes the development of scientific literacy commencing at the primary school level. This Vision focuses on using English as the Medium of Instruction (EMI) for teaching primary science, as Malaysia has English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in its curriculum. What changes need to occur in preservice teacher education programs for learning about primary science using EMI? This paper investigates the education of Malaysian preservice teachers for learning how to teach one strand in science education (i.e., space, primary astronomy) in an English-language context. Ninety-six second-year preservice teachers from two Malaysian institutes were involved in a 16-week “Earth and Space” course, half the course involved education about primary astronomy. Seventy-five of these preservice teachers provided written responses about the course and their development as potential teachers of primary astronomy using EMI. Preservice teacher assessments and multimedia presentations provided further evidence on learning how to teach primary astronomy. Many of these preservice teachers claimed that learning to teach primary astronomy needs to focus on teaching strategies, content knowledge with easy-to-understand concepts, computer simulations (e.g., Earth Centered Universe, Stellarium, Celestia), other ICT media, and field experiences that use naked-eye observations and telescopes to investigate celestial bodies. Although generally proficient in using ICT, they claimed there were EFL barriers for learning some new terminology. Nevertheless, powerpoints, animations, videos, and simulations were identified as effective ICT tools for providing clear visual representations of abstract concepts and ways to enhance the learning process.

Fusing curricula : science, technology and ICT

Curriculum demands continue to increase on school education systems with teachers at the forefront of implementing syllabus requirements. Education is reported frequently as a solution to most societal problems and, as a result of the world’s information explosion, teachers are expected to cover more and more within teaching programs. How can teachers combine subjects in order to capitalise on the competing educational agendas within school timeframes? Fusing curricula requires the bonding of standards from two or more syllabuses. Both technology and ICT complement the learning of science. This study analyses selected examples of preservice teachers’ overviews for fusing science, technology and ICT. These program overviews focused on primary students and the achievement of two standards (one from science and one from either technology or ICT). These primary preservice teachers’ fused-curricula overviews included scientific concepts and related technology and/or ICT skills and knowledge. Findings indicated a range of innovative curriculum plans for teaching primary science through technology and ICT, demonstrating that these subjects can form cohesive links towards achieving the respective learning standards. Teachers can work more astutely by fusing curricula; however further professional development may be required to advance thinking about these processes. Bonding subjects through their learning standards can extend beyond previous integration or thematic work where standards may not have been assessed. Education systems need to articulate through syllabus documents how effective fusing of curricula can be achieved. It appears that education is a key avenue for addressing societal needs, problems and issues. Education is promoted as a universal solution, which has resulted in curriculum overload (Dare, Durand, Moeller, & Washington, 1997; Vinson, 2001). Societal and curriculum demands have placed added pressure on teachers with many extenuating education issues increasing teachers’ workloads (Mobilise for Public Education, 2002). For example, as Australia has weather conducive for outdoor activities, social problems and issues arise that are reported through the media calling for action; consequently schools have been involved in swimming programs, road and bicycle safety programs, and a wide range of activities that had been considered a parental responsibility in the past. Teachers are expected to plan, implement and assess these extra-curricula activities within their already overcrowded timetables. At the same stage, key learning areas (KLAs) such as science and technology are mandatory requirements within all Australian education systems. These systems have syllabuses outlining levels of content and the anticipated learning outcomes (also known as standards, essential learnings, and frameworks). Time allocated for teaching science in obviously an issue. In 2001, it was estimated that on average the time spent in teaching science in Australian Primary Schools was almost an hour per week (Goodrum, Hackling, & Rennie, 2001). More recently, a study undertaken in the U.S. reported a similar finding. More than 80% of the teachers in K-5 classrooms spent less than an hour teaching science (Dorph, Goldstein, Lee, et al., 2007). More importantly, 16% did not spend teaching science in their classrooms. Teachers need to learn to work smarter by optimising the use of their in-class time. Integration is proposed as one of the ways to address the issue of curriculum overload (Venville & Dawson, 2005; Vogler, 2003). Even though there may be a lack of definition for integration (Hurley, 2001), curriculum integration aims at covering key concepts in two or more subject areas within the same lesson (Buxton & Whatley, 2002). This implies covering the curriculum in less time than if the subjects were taught separately; therefore teachers should have more time to cover other educational issues. Expectedly, the reality can be decidedly different (e.g., Brophy & Alleman, 1991; Venville & Dawson, 2005). Nevertheless, teachers report that students expand their knowledge and skills as a result of subject integration (James, Lamb, Householder, & Bailey, 2000). There seems to be considerable value for integrating science with other KLAs besides aiming to address teaching workloads. Over two decades ago, Cohen and Staley (1982) claimed that integration can bring a subject into the primary curriculum that may be otherwise left out. Integrating science education aims to develop a more holistic perspective. Indeed, life is not neat components of stand-alone subjects; life integrates subject content in numerous ways, and curriculum integration can assist students to make these real-life connections (Burnett & Wichman, 1997). Science integration can provide the scope for real-life learning and the possibility of targeting students’ learning styles more effectively by providing more than one perspective (Hudson & Hudson, 2001). To illustrate, technology is essential to science education (Blueford & Rosenbloom, 2003; Board of Studies, 1999; Penick, 2002), and constructing technology immediately evokes a social purpose for such construction (Marker, 1992). For example, building a model windmill requires science and technology (Zubrowski, 2002) but has a key focus on sustainability and the social sciences. Science has the potential to be integrated with all KLAs (e.g., Cohen & Staley, 1982; Dobbs, 1995; James et al., 2000). Yet, “integration” appears to be a confusing term. Integration has an educational meaning focused on special education students being assimilated into mainstream classrooms. The word integration was used in the late seventies and generally focused around thematic approaches for teaching. For instance, a science theme about flight only has to have a student drawing a picture of plane to show integration; it did not connect the anticipated outcomes from science and art. The term “fusing curricula” presents a seamless bonding between two subjects; hence standards (or outcomes) need to be linked from both subjects. This also goes beyond just embedding one subject within another. Embedding implies that one subject is dominant, while fusing curricula proposes an equal mix of learning within both subject areas. Primary education in Queensland has eight KLAs, each with its established content and each with a proposed structure for levels of learning. Primary teachers attempt to cover these syllabus requirements across the eight KLAs in less than five hours a day, and between many of the extra-curricula activities occurring throughout a school year (e.g., Easter activities, Education Week, concerts, excursions, performances). In Australia, education systems have developed standards for all KLAs (e.g., Education Queensland, NSW Department of Education and Training, Victorian Education) usually designated by a code. In the late 1990’s (in Queensland), “core learning outcomes” for strands across all KLA’s. For example, LL2.1 for the Queensland Education science syllabus means Life and Living at Level 2 standard number 1. Thus, a teacher’s planning requires the inclusion of standards as indicated by the presiding syllabus. More recently, the core learning outcomes were replaced by “essential learnings”. They specify “what students should be taught and what is important for students to have opportunities to know, understand and be able to do” (Queensland Studies Authority, 2009, para. 1). Fusing science education with other KLAs may facilitate more efficient use of time and resources; however this type of planning needs to combine standards from two syllabuses. To further assist in facilitating sound pedagogical practices, there are models proposed for learning science, technology and other KLAs such as Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956), Productive Pedagogies (Education Queensland, 2004), de Bono’s Six Hats (de Bono, 1985), and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (Gardner, 1999) that imply, warrant, or necessitate fused curricula. Bybee’s 5 Es, for example, has five levels of learning (engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate; Bybee, 1997) can have the potential for fusing science and ICT standards.

Comparing mentors’ reports on their own mentoring of primary preservice teachers

Implementing the Australian Curriculum will require targeting both teachers and preservice teachers as enactors of reform. Classroom teachers in their roles as mentors have a significant role to play for developing preservice teachers. What mentors do in their mentoring practices and what mentors think about mentoring will impact on the mentoring processes and ultimately reform outcomes. What are mentors’ reports on their mentoring of preservice teachers for teaching science and mathematics? This quantitative study presents mentors’ reports on their mentoring of primary preservice teachers (mentees) in mathematics (n=43) and science (n=29). Drawing upon a previously validated instrument (Hudson, 2007), this instrument was amended to allow mentors to report on their perceptions of their mentoring. Mentors claimed they mentored teaching mathematics more than science. However, 20% or more indicated they did not provide mentoring practices for 25 out of 34 survey items in the science and 9 out of 34 items in the mathematics. Educational reform will necessity mentors to be educated on effective mentoring practices for mathematics and science so the mentoring process can be more purposeful. Indeed, mentors who have knowledge of such practices may address the potential issues of more than 20% of mentees not receiving these practices. To ensure the greatest success for an Australian Curriculum mentors may need professional development in order to assist mentees’ development into the profession.

Analysing mentoring dialogues for developing a preservice teacher’s classroom management practices

Mentors (cooperating classroom teachers) have a shared responsibility with universities for developing preservice teachers’ pedagogical practices, particularly towards becoming reflective practitioners. Preservice teachers need to participate actively in their own learning, by reflecting and acting on the mentor’s constructive feedback provided during planning and feedback dialogue sessions. This case study uses feedback practices outlined within a five-factor mentoring model to analyse dialogue between a mentor and her respective mentee during different stages in their school-based programs (first practicum). This investigation uses multiple data sources such as video and audio-recorded interviews, archival documents from participants such as lesson plans, reflections and reports to examine preservice teacher’s reflections and implementations of practice as a result of her mentor’s feedback (e.g., establish expectations, review lesson plans, observe teaching then provide oral and written feedback, and evaluate progress). Findings indicated that reflective thinking was more apparent when the mentor did not dominate conversations but instead asked astute pedagogical knowledge questions to facilitate the mentee’s reflections on practice.

Preservice teachers teaching technology with robotics

This study investigates the value of a robotics-based school engagement experience for preservice teachers enrolled in a fourth year technology education curriculum unit and analyses their perceived abilities and confidence to design and implement engaging technology activities following this experience. Technology is a key learning area in Australian schools but research shows that most teachers find this subject challenging to teach. This could be attributed to teachers’ attitudes and their lack of knowledge, hence investigating preservice teachers’ involvement with technology may provide further insights. In this study, 30 preservice teachers used robotics to implement technology activities with 22 primary school students from a school in a low socio-economic area. Surveys were administered to ascertain the preservice teachers' perceptions of their school engagement experiences. The data gathered from the participants showed that they had gained confidence and knowledge from the experience and felt the engagement activity would assist them to develop and implement technology activities in their future classrooms.

Examining preservice teachers’ applied learning experiences in the Teacher Education Done Differently (TEDD) project

Reviews have criticised universities for not embedding sufficient praxis for preparing preservice teachers for the profession. The Teacher Education Done Differently (TEDD) project explored praxis development for preservice teachers within existing university coursework. This mixed-method investigation involved an analysis of multiple case studies with preservice teacher involvement in university programs, namely: Ed Start for practicum I (n=26), III (n=23), and IV (n=12); Move It Use It (Health and Physical Education program; n=38), Studies of Society and its Environment (SOSE, n=24), and Science in Schools (n=38). The project included preservice teachers teaching primary students at the campus site in gifted education (the B-GR8 program, n=22). The percentage range for preservice teacher agreement of their praxis development leading up to practicum I, III, and IV was between 91-100% with a high mean score range (4.26-5.00). Other university units had similar findings except for SOSE (i.e., percentage range: 10-86%; M range: 2.33-4.00; SD range: 0.55-1.32). Qualitative data presented an understanding of the praxis development leading to the conclusion that additional applied learning experiences as lead-up days for field experiences and as avenues for exploring the teaching of specific subject areas presented opportunities for enhancing praxis.

Australia at the crossroads : a review of school science practical work

In Australia we are at a crossroad in science education. We have come from a long history of adopting international curricula, through to blending international and Australian developed materials, to the present which is a thoroughly unique Australian curriculum in science. This paper documents Australia’s journey over the past 200 years, as we prepare for the unveiling of our first truly Australian National Curriculum. One of the unique aspects of this curriculum is the emphasis on practical work and inquiry-based learning. This paper identifies seven forms of practical work currently used in Australian schools and the purposes aligned with each form by 138 pre-service and experienced in-service teachers. The paper explores the question “What does the impending national curriculum, with its emphasis on practical inquiry mean to the teachers now, are they ready?” The study suggests that practical work in Australian schools is multifaceted, and the teacher aligned purposes are dependent not only upon the age of the student, but also on the type of practical work being undertaken. It was found that most teachers are not ready to teach using inquiry-based pedagogy and cite lack of content knowledge, behaviour management, and lack of physical resources and availability of classroom space as key issues which will hinder their implementation of the inquiry component of Australia’s pending curriculum in science.