Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
Primary/elementary teachers are uniquely positioned in terms of their need for ongoing, science-focused professional development. They are usually generalists, having limited preparation for teaching science, and often do not feel prepared or comfortable in teaching science. In this case study, CHAT or cultural–historical activity theory is used as a lens to examine primary/elementary teachers’ activity system as they engaged in a teacher-driven professional development initiative. Teachers engaged in collaborative action research to change their practice, with the objective of making their science teaching more engaging and hands-on for students. A range of qualitative methods and sources such as teacher interviews and reflections, teacher-created artifacts, and researcher observational notes were adopted to gain insight into teacher learning. Outcomes report on how the teachers’ activity system changed as they participated in two cycles of collaborative action research and how the contradictions that arose in their activity system became sources of professional growth. Furthermore, this research shows how the framework of activity theory may be used to garner insight into the activity and learning of teachers as both their professional activities and the context change over time.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 1–12. CrossRef
Backhurst, D. (2009). Reflections on activity theory. Educational Review, 61, 197–210. CrossRef
Bellamy, R. K. (1996). Designing educational technology: Computer-mediated change. In B. A. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human–computer interaction (pp. 123–146). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London: Falmer.
Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research. (2003–2004). The activity system. http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/pages/chatanddwr/activitysystem/
Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 815–843. CrossRef
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Day, C., & Sachs, J. (2004). International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Eilks, I., & Markic, S. (2011). Effects of a long-term participatory action research project on science teachers’ professional development. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 7(3), 149–160.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1–18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Evernote Corporation. (2015). Evernote [Web application]. Retrieved December 7, 2015 from https://evernote.com/
Fraser, C. A. (2010). Continuing professional development and learning in primary science classrooms. Teacher Development, 14(1), 85–106. CrossRef
Goodnough, K., Pelech, S., & Stordy, M. (2014). Effective professional development in STEM Education: The perceptions of primary/elementary teachers. Teacher Education and Practice, 27 (2–3), 402–423.
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. (2004). Biology 3201 curriculum guide. http://www.ed.gov.nl.ca/edu/k12/curriculum/guides/science/bio3201/intro.pdf
Greenwood, D. J., & Levin, M. (2006). Introduction to action research: Social research for social change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hanafin, J. (2014). Multiple intelligences theory, action research, and teacher professional development: The Irish MI project. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(4), 126–142. CrossRef
Hume, A. C. (2012). Primary connections: Simulating the classroom in initial teacher education. Research in Science Education, 42, 551–565. CrossRef
Jeynes, W. H. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relation of parental involvement to urban elementary school student academic achievement. Urban Education, 40(3), 237–269. CrossRef
Jeynes, W. H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban secondary school student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Urban Education, 42(1), 82–110. CrossRef
Johannessen, Ø. L. (2015). Negotiating and reshaping Christian values and professional identities through action research: Experiential learning and professional development among Christian religious education teachers. Educational Action Research, 23, 331–349. CrossRef
Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. A. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln, N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 559–603). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human–computer interaction (pp. 17–44). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Leontiev, A. A. (1981). Sign and activity. In J. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 241–255). New York: Sharpe.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry: The paradigm revolution. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Loxley, A., Johnston, K., Murchan, D., Fitzgerald, H., & Quinn, M. (2007). The role of whole-school contexts in shaping the experiences and outcomes associated with professional development. Journal of In-service Education, 33, 265–285. CrossRef
Mak, B., & Pun, S. (2015). Cultivating a teacher community of practice for sustainable professional development: Beyond planned efforts. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 21(1), 4–21. CrossRef
McIntyre, D. (2005). Bridging the gap between research and practice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35(3), 357–382. CrossRef
McNiff, J. (2013). Action research: Principles and practice. London: Routledge.
McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2011). All you need to know about action research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Meiers, M., Ingvarson, L., & Beavis, A. (2005). Factors affecting the impact of professional development programs on teachers’ knowledge, practice, student outcomes & efficacy. http://research.acer.edu.au/professional_dev/1
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mills, G. (2010). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Boston: Pearson.
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction-what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984–2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 474–496. CrossRef
Murphy, E., & Rodrigues-Manzanares, M. (Eds.). (2014). Activity theory perspectives on technology in higher education. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Murray, J. (2014). Designing and implementing effective professional learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. CrossRef
Nardi, B. A. (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human–computer interaction. London: MIT Press.
Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Youngs, P. (2000). Professional development that addresses school capacity: Lessons from urban elementary schools. American Journal of Education, 108, 259–299. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1085442
Opfer, D., & Pedder, D. V. (2011). The lost promise of teacher professional development in England. European Journal of Education, 34, 3–24. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2010.534131
Roschelle, J. (1998). Activity theory: A foundation for designing learning technology? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 241–255. CrossRef
Roth, W. M., & Tobin, K. (2002). Redesigning an ‘urban’ teacher education program: An activity theory perspective. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(2), 108–131. CrossRef
Sezen-Barrie, A., Tran, M., McDonald, S. P., & Kelly, G. J. (2014). A Cultural Historical Activity Theory perspective to understand preservice science teachers’ reflections on and tensions during a microteaching experience. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9, 675–697. CrossRef
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22, 63–75.
Smith, D. C., & Anderson, C. W. (1999). Appropriating scientific practices and discourses with future elementary teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 755–776. CrossRef
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Steiner, L. (2004). Designing effective professional development experiences: What do we know. Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates.
Stringer, E. (2013). Action research. London: Sage.
Tilgner, P. J. (1990). Avoiding science in the elementary school. Science Education, 74, 421–431. CrossRef
Tillotson, J. W., & Young, M.J. (2013). The IMPPACT project: A model for studying how preservice program experiences influence science teachers’ beliefs and practices. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1(3), 148–161. http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/ijemst/article/viewFile/5000036025/5000034944
Timperley, H. (2008). Teacher professional learning and development. Geneva: International Bureau of Education. http://www.orientation94.org/uploaded/MakalatPdf/Manchurat/EdPractices_18.pdf
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (original work published in 1934).
Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in Education, 24, 173–209. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1167270
Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2010). Activity systems analysis methods: Understanding complex learning environments. New York: Springer. CrossRef
Yin, X., & Buck, G. A. (2015). There is another choice: An exploration of integrating formative assessment in a Chinese high school chemistry classroom through collaborative action research. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10, 719–752. CrossRef
Zembal-Saul, C., Blumenfeld, P., & Krajcik, J. (2000). Influence of guided cycles of planning, teaching, and reflection on prospective elementary teachers’ science content representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 318–339. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200004)37:4<318:AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-W CrossRef
Zimmerman, B. S., Morgan, D. N., & Kidder-Brown, M. K. (2014). The use of conceptual and pedagogical tools as mediators of preservice teachers’ perceptions of self as writers and future teachers of writing. Action in Teacher Education, 36, 141–156. CrossRef
- Professional Learning of K-6 Teachers in Science Through Collaborative Action Research: An Activity Theory Analysis
- Springer Netherlands
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta