How do organizational conditions inform teachers’ equity self‐efficacy and implementation during professional development?

IF 3.1 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Science & Education Pub Date : 2024-07-26 DOI:10.1002/sce.21892
Kathryn N. Hayes, Jessica R. Gladstone, Brit Toven‐Lindsey, Christine L. Bae
{"title":"How do organizational conditions inform teachers’ equity self‐efficacy and implementation during professional development?","authors":"Kathryn N. Hayes, Jessica R. Gladstone, Brit Toven‐Lindsey, Christine L. Bae","doi":"10.1002/sce.21892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper is part of the special issue on Teacher Learning and Practice within Organizational Contexts. Shifting instructional practices in elementary schools to include more equitable, reform‐based pedagogies is imperative for supporting students’ development as science learners. Teachers need high quality professional development (PD) to learn such practices, but research shows considerable variability in the extent to which teachers implement instructional practices learned during PD. Individual teacher characteristics such as self‐efficacy may influence teacher learning during PD, but only account for part of the variability. The organizational conditions of teachers’ schools and districts may also play a key role in teachers’ implementation of new instructional practices. However, because systematic research in this area in science education is still nascent, it is difficult for districts and PD providers to address organizational barriers to professional learning. To meet this need, we conducted an explanatory mixed‐methods study using surveys (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 54) and interviews (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 19) of elementary teachers engaged in equity‐focused, reform‐based science PD, testing the degree to which a conceptually framed set of organizational conditions predicted teacher equity self‐efficacy and instructional practice alignment. Out of the 11 organizational conditions, only teacher professional impact and their sense of autonomy in their instructional practice explained variance in the outcomes. Qualitative findings showed these relationships to be iterative and recursive, rather than linear. Our findings underscore the essential role of teacher professionalism and sense of agency over commonly cited organizational conditions such as materials and labs in supporting teachers to implement more equitable science instructional practices during PD.","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"131 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21892","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper is part of the special issue on Teacher Learning and Practice within Organizational Contexts. Shifting instructional practices in elementary schools to include more equitable, reform‐based pedagogies is imperative for supporting students’ development as science learners. Teachers need high quality professional development (PD) to learn such practices, but research shows considerable variability in the extent to which teachers implement instructional practices learned during PD. Individual teacher characteristics such as self‐efficacy may influence teacher learning during PD, but only account for part of the variability. The organizational conditions of teachers’ schools and districts may also play a key role in teachers’ implementation of new instructional practices. However, because systematic research in this area in science education is still nascent, it is difficult for districts and PD providers to address organizational barriers to professional learning. To meet this need, we conducted an explanatory mixed‐methods study using surveys (N = 54) and interviews (N = 19) of elementary teachers engaged in equity‐focused, reform‐based science PD, testing the degree to which a conceptually framed set of organizational conditions predicted teacher equity self‐efficacy and instructional practice alignment. Out of the 11 organizational conditions, only teacher professional impact and their sense of autonomy in their instructional practice explained variance in the outcomes. Qualitative findings showed these relationships to be iterative and recursive, rather than linear. Our findings underscore the essential role of teacher professionalism and sense of agency over commonly cited organizational conditions such as materials and labs in supporting teachers to implement more equitable science instructional practices during PD.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在专业发展过程中,组织条件如何影响教师的公平自我效能感和实施?
本文是 "组织背景下的教师学习与实践 "特刊的一部分。要支持学生作为科学学习者的发展,就必须改变小学的教学实践,使其包括更公平的、以改革为基础的教学法。教师需要高质量的专业发展(PD)来学习这些实践,但研究表明,教师在实施专业发展期间所学到的教学实践方面存在着相当大的差异。教师的个体特征(如自我效能感)可能会影响教师在专业发展过程中的学习,但这只 是造成差异的部分原因。教师所在学校和地区的组织条件也可能对教师实施新的教学实践起到关键作用。然而,由于科学教育领域在这方面的系统研究尚处于起步阶段,因此地区和专业进修提供者很难解决专业学习的组织障碍。为了满足这一需求,我们使用调查(54 人)和访谈(19 人)对参与以公平为重点、以改革为基础的科学专业培训的小学教师进行了一项解释性混合方法研究,测试了一套概念化的组织条件对教师公平自我效能感和教学实践一致性的预测程度。在 11 个组织条件中,只有教师的专业影响和他们在教学实践中的自主意识可以解释结果的差异。定性研究结果表明,这些关系是迭代和递归的,而不是线性关系。我们的研究结果凸显了教师的专业水平和自主意识对材料和实验室等常见组织条件的重要作用,从而支持教师在PD期间实施更公平的科学教学实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Science & Education
Science & Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
14.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Science Education publishes original articles on the latest issues and trends occurring internationally in science curriculum, instruction, learning, policy and preparation of science teachers with the aim to advance our knowledge of science education theory and practice. In addition to original articles, the journal features the following special sections: -Learning : consisting of theoretical and empirical research studies on learning of science. We invite manuscripts that investigate learning and its change and growth from various lenses, including psychological, social, cognitive, sociohistorical, and affective. Studies examining the relationship of learning to teaching, the science knowledge and practices, the learners themselves, and the contexts (social, political, physical, ideological, institutional, epistemological, and cultural) are similarly welcome. -Issues and Trends : consisting primarily of analytical, interpretive, or persuasive essays on current educational, social, or philosophical issues and trends relevant to the teaching of science. This special section particularly seeks to promote informed dialogues about current issues in science education, and carefully reasoned papers representing disparate viewpoints are welcomed. Manuscripts submitted for this section may be in the form of a position paper, a polemical piece, or a creative commentary. -Science Learning in Everyday Life : consisting of analytical, interpretative, or philosophical papers regarding learning science outside of the formal classroom. Papers should investigate experiences in settings such as community, home, the Internet, after school settings, museums, and other opportunities that develop science interest, knowledge or practices across the life span. Attention to issues and factors relating to equity in science learning are especially encouraged.. -Science Teacher Education [...]
期刊最新文献
From COVID-19 to Quartile 1: Editor’s Reflections and Farewell Issue Information Sustainability as Living Architecture Designing and leading justice‐centered informal STEM education: A framework for core equitable practices Reflection time and valuing science: Elementary teachers' science subject matter knowledge development during teaching experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1