评估探究实践:专业发展计划能改变科学教师的实践吗?

IF 2.1 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Science Teacher Education Pub Date : 2022-03-04 DOI:10.1080/1046560X.2021.2005229
Christina Tsaliki, P. Papadopoulou, George Malandrakis, P. Kariotoglou
{"title":"评估探究实践:专业发展计划能改变科学教师的实践吗?","authors":"Christina Tsaliki, P. Papadopoulou, George Malandrakis, P. Kariotoglou","doi":"10.1080/1046560X.2021.2005229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the last 30 years, there has been an ongoing discussion about the effectiveness of Professional Development (PD) programs, which aims to promote reform-based Science Education (SE). Among the many, different trends of reform-based science teaching, inquiry-based approaches hold a dominant role. This study shows how teachers’ practices were affected by a PD program that aimed to familiarize them with reform-based teaching through gradual instructional design, with the main focus on inquiry. The PD program had a duration of 12 months and involved four science teachers (two primary and two secondary) who were trained in both in and out of school teaching settings. The changes in teachers’ practices were recorded through an observation protocol containing predefined categories in eight domains, one of which––that of inquiry––is discussed in this paper. A semi-quantitative method was used for data analysis. Results indicate that all the teachers had an overall improvement in the domains of guided inquiry practices and student-centered teaching approaches. However, there did not appear to be any substantial progress in open inquiry practices. Restrictions of the present study are presented, and suggestions for improving future PD programs promoting sustainable inquiry implementation are also discussed.","PeriodicalId":47326,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Teacher Education","volume":"33 1","pages":"815 - 836"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Inquiry Practices: Can a Professional Development Program Reform Science Teachers’ Practices?\",\"authors\":\"Christina Tsaliki, P. Papadopoulou, George Malandrakis, P. Kariotoglou\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1046560X.2021.2005229\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In the last 30 years, there has been an ongoing discussion about the effectiveness of Professional Development (PD) programs, which aims to promote reform-based Science Education (SE). Among the many, different trends of reform-based science teaching, inquiry-based approaches hold a dominant role. This study shows how teachers’ practices were affected by a PD program that aimed to familiarize them with reform-based teaching through gradual instructional design, with the main focus on inquiry. The PD program had a duration of 12 months and involved four science teachers (two primary and two secondary) who were trained in both in and out of school teaching settings. The changes in teachers’ practices were recorded through an observation protocol containing predefined categories in eight domains, one of which––that of inquiry––is discussed in this paper. A semi-quantitative method was used for data analysis. Results indicate that all the teachers had an overall improvement in the domains of guided inquiry practices and student-centered teaching approaches. However, there did not appear to be any substantial progress in open inquiry practices. Restrictions of the present study are presented, and suggestions for improving future PD programs promoting sustainable inquiry implementation are also discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Science Teacher Education\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"815 - 836\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Science Teacher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.2005229\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Science Teacher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.2005229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在过去的30年里,关于专业发展(PD)计划的有效性的讨论一直在进行,该计划旨在促进以改革为基础的科学教育(SE)。在改革型科学教学的众多不同趋势中,探究性教学占据主导地位。本研究展示了PD计划如何影响教师的实践,该计划旨在通过渐进式教学设计使教师熟悉以改革为基础的教学,主要侧重于探究。PD项目为期12个月,涉及四名科学教师(两名小学教师和两名中学教师),他们在学校内外的教学环境中接受了培训。教师实践的变化是通过一个观察协议记录下来的,该协议包含八个领域的预定义类别,其中一个领域——探究——在本文中进行了讨论。数据分析采用半定量方法。结果表明,所有教师在指导性探究实践和以学生为中心的教学方法方面都有全面的提高。然而,在公开调查做法方面似乎没有任何实质性进展。提出了本研究的局限性,并对未来PD计划的改进提出了建议,以促进可持续的探究实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Evaluating Inquiry Practices: Can a Professional Development Program Reform Science Teachers’ Practices?
ABSTRACT In the last 30 years, there has been an ongoing discussion about the effectiveness of Professional Development (PD) programs, which aims to promote reform-based Science Education (SE). Among the many, different trends of reform-based science teaching, inquiry-based approaches hold a dominant role. This study shows how teachers’ practices were affected by a PD program that aimed to familiarize them with reform-based teaching through gradual instructional design, with the main focus on inquiry. The PD program had a duration of 12 months and involved four science teachers (two primary and two secondary) who were trained in both in and out of school teaching settings. The changes in teachers’ practices were recorded through an observation protocol containing predefined categories in eight domains, one of which––that of inquiry––is discussed in this paper. A semi-quantitative method was used for data analysis. Results indicate that all the teachers had an overall improvement in the domains of guided inquiry practices and student-centered teaching approaches. However, there did not appear to be any substantial progress in open inquiry practices. Restrictions of the present study are presented, and suggestions for improving future PD programs promoting sustainable inquiry implementation are also discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Science Teacher Education
Journal of Science Teacher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
10.50%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Journal of Science Teacher Education (JSTE) is the flagship journal of the Association for Science Teacher Education. It serves as a forum for disseminating high quality research and theoretical position papers concerning preservice and inservice education of science teachers. The Journal features pragmatic articles that offer ways to improve classroom teaching and learning, professional development, and teacher recruitment and retention at pre K-16 levels.
期刊最新文献
Where’s the Peanut Butter? Journaling about Science Practices in Everyday Life Integrating Text Structure Instruction in Science Education: A Design-Based Study What Makes this Lesson Engineering? What Makes it Science? Examining the Thought Processes of Pre-Service Elementary Teachers Science Teacher Action Research in Top Tier Science Education Journals: A Review of the Literature Integrated Language and Science & Technology Instruction: A Cognitive Task Analysis of the Required Teacher Expertise
×
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