Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Examining the Beliefs and Practices of Four Effective Australian Primary Science Teachers

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With trends across many countries still indicating the decline of student interest in school science and diminishing numbers of students studying science beyond the compulsory years, it seems that the field remains in crisis. To address these unfortunate trends, there needs to be a greater emphasis on science education research that highlights the good news stories. For example, what are science teachers actually doing in their classrooms to increase student interest and understanding in science? This article focuses on the science teaching beliefs and practices of four Western Australian primary school teachers. The teachers were nominated by a professional colleague as effective practitioners. The study involved gathering information from classroom observations and teacher interviews to provide background information to assist in developing understandings of these teachers and their science teaching. This article reports on the initial findings drawn from Deanne A, Kate B, Lisa C and Rebecca D. Their practices were organised into the following six categories: classroom environment; conceptual knowledge and procedural skills; teaching strategies and approaches; student-specific considerations; teacher-specific considerations; and context-specific considerations. In examining the components contributing to these categories, it was evident that the teachers’ beliefs, as well as the contextual factors inherent in each classroom environment, influenced how and why they teach science in the ways they do.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akerson, V. (2005). How do elementary teachers compensate for incomplete science content knowledge? Research in Science Education, 35(2), 245–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angus, M., Olney, H., & Ainley, J. (2007). In the balance: The future of Australia’s primary schools. Kaleen, ACT: Australian Primary Principals Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appleton, K. (2002). Science activities that work: Perceptions of primary school teachers. Research in Science Education, 32(3), 393–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleton, K. (2006). Science pedagogical content knowledge and elementary school teachers. In K. Appleton (Ed.), Elementary science teacher education: International perspectives on contemporary issues and practice (pp. 31–54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Science Teachers Association and Teaching Australia. (2009). National professional standards for highly accomplished teachers of science. Canberra: Australian Science Teachers Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayres, P., Sawyer, W., & Dinham, S. (2004). Effective teaching in the context of a grade 12 high-stakes external examination in New South Wales, Australia. British Educational Research Journal, 30(1), 141–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beasley, W., & Butler, J. (2002, July). Implementation of context-based schooling within the freedoms offered by Queensland schooling. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Townsville, QLD.

  • Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (4th ed.). Needam Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brickhouse, N. (1990). Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 15(4), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R.W. (2006, August). Boosting science learning through the design of curriculum materials. Paper presented at a meeting of the Australian Council for Educational Research Conference, Canberra, ACT.

  • Campbell, C., & Tytler, R. (2007). Views of student learning. In V. Dawson & G. Venville (Eds.), The art of teaching primary science (pp. 23–42). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission, E. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, J. (1986). On narrative methods, personal philosophy, and narrative unities in the study of teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(4), 293–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., & Treagust, D. (1998). Learning in science: From behaviourism towards social constructivism and beyond. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3–25). Dodrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A. (1983). The elementary level science methods course: Breeding ground of apprehension toward science? A case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(8), 745–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feasey, R. (2012). Thinking and working scientifically. In K. Skamp (Ed.), Teaching primary science constructively (4th ed.). Melbourne, Vic: Cengage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (1985). Science for all: A reflective essay. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 17(4), 415–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P.J. (2006, August). Student interest in science: The problem, possible solutions and constraints. Paper presented at a meeting of the Australian Council for Educational Research, Canberra, ACT.

  • Fischer-Mueller, J., & Zeidler, D. L. (2002). A case study of teacher beliefs in contemporary science education goals and classroom practices. Science Educator, 11(1), 46–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R. M., & White, R. T. (1978). Memory structures and learning outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 48(2), 187–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodrum, D. (2006, August). Inquiry in science classrooms - rhetoric or reality? Paper presented at the meeting of the Australian Council for Educational Research, Canberra, ACT.

  • Goodrum, D., Cousins, J., & Kinnear, A. (1992). The reluctant primary school teacher. Research in Science Education, 22(1), 163–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodrum, D., Hackling, M., & Rennie, L. (2001). The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools. Canberra, ACT: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Retrieved April 22, 2010, from http://www.dest.gov.au/schools_publications

  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, L., & Galton, M. (2002). Transfer from the primary classroom: 20 years on. London, UK: Routledge Falmer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W. (1997). Primary teachers’ understanding in science and its impact in the classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(3), 323–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W. (2009). Teaching and learning science for a better future. School Science Review, 333, 33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, A. (2007). The wonder of science. In V. Dawson & G. Venville (Eds.), The art of teaching primary science (pp. 3–22). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. A. (1992). Towards a model of schooling: A synthesis of meta-analyses. Australian Journal of Education, 36, 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Killen, R. (2007). Effective teaching strategies: Lessons from research and practice. South Melbourne, Vic: Cengage Learning Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, K., Shumow, L., & Lietz, S. (2001). Science education in an urban elementary school: Case studies of teacher beliefs and classroom practices. Science Education, 85(2), 89–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods and findings. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 27–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, K. E. (2001). An analysis of elementary teachers’ beliefs regarding the teaching and learning of science. Science Education, 86(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl, B. (2007, April). A longitudinal study of students’ attitudes towards science and choice of career. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.

  • Lyons, T. (2005). Different countries, same science classes: Students’ experiences of school science in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 591–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansour, N. (2009). Science teachers’ beliefs and practices: Issues, implications and research agenda. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(1), 25–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Making meaning in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). Time spent teaching core academic subjects in elementary schools: Comparisons across community, school, teacher, and student characteristics. Washington DC: NCES.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naylor, S., & Keogh, B. (2000). Concept cartoons in science education. Sandbach: Millgate House Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ornstein, A. (1986). Teacher effectiveness research: Some ideas and issues. Education and Urban Society, 18(2), 168–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. (2003). Postnote: Primary science. Retrieved 30 January, 2012 from http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/pn202.pdf

  • Peshkin, A. (2000). The nature of interpretation in qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 29(9), 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomeroy, D. (1993). Implications of teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science: Comparison of the beliefs of scientists, secondary science teachers, and elementary teachers. Science Education, 77(3), 261–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, J. M. (1998). Mission impossible? Can anything be done about attitudes to science? International Journal of Science Education, 20(2), 125–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, V. (1997). Constructivist teaching and teacher education: Theory and practice. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Constructivist teacher education: Building new understandings (pp. 3–14). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B., & Lave, J. (Eds.). (1984). Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2004). Sowing the seeds of ROSE: Background, rationale, questionnaire development and data collection for ROSE – A comparative study of students’ views of science and science education. (Acta Didactica 4/2004). Norway: Department of Teacher Education and School Development, University of Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skamp, K. (2007). Conceptual learning in the primary and middle years: The interplay of heads, hearts and hands-on science. Teaching Science, 53(3), 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 435–454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Symington, D., & Tytler, R. (2004). Community leaders’ views of the purposes of science in the compulsory years of schooling. International Journal of Science Education, 26(11), 1403–1418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Royal Society. (2006). Taking a leading role. London, UK: The Royal Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K., & Fraser, B. J. (1990). What does it mean to be an exemplary science teacher? Journal of Research into Science Teaching, 27(1), 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tytler, R. (2003). A window for a purpose: Developing a framework for describing effective science teaching and learning. Research in Science Education, 33(3), 273–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tytler, R. (2007). Re-imagining science education: Engaging students in science for Australia’s future. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tytler, R., Waldrip, B., & Griffiths, M. (2002). Talking to effective teachers of primary science. Investigating, 18(4), 11–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (pp. 79–91). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Applications of case study research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Monash University, Berwick Campus, Clyde Rd, Berwick, 3806, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Angela Fitzgerald

  2. Curtin University, Perth, Australia

    Vaille Dawson

  3. Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia

    Mark Hackling

Authors
  1. Angela Fitzgerald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vaille Dawson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark Hackling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angela Fitzgerald.

Appendix 1: Teacher Interview Questions

Appendix 1: Teacher Interview Questions

  1. 1.

    What do you think about when you plan science lessons?

  2. 2.

    What do you hope your students will achieve from your science lessons?

  3. 3.

    Describe one of your science lessons that went really well. In what ways was this lesson a success? Why did it go really well?

  4. 4.

    What do you consider to be characteristics of effective science teaching?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fitzgerald, A., Dawson, V. & Hackling, M. Examining the Beliefs and Practices of Four Effective Australian Primary Science Teachers. Res Sci Educ 43, 981–1003 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9297-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9297-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation