Scott P. McDonald

Science learning and epistemology

Learning theories presuppose views about knowledge. Different learning theories in science rely on, and draw from, various epistemological perspectives. In this chapter, we will examine the relationship between learning and epistemology in science education. We consider the ways that history, philosophy, and sociology of science have informed learning theory (disciplinary perspective), ways that students’ personal epistemologies influence learning (personal ways of knowing), and emerging studies of practical epistemologies that consider ways that disciplinary practices are enacted interactionally in learning contexts (social practices perspective). We consider how conceptions of knowledge are operationalized in science learning research across these perspectives and draw implications for research in science education.

Beyond Argumentation: Sense-Making Discourse in the Science Classroom

This chapter considers argumentation in science education in the larger context of discourse in science classrooms. While there has been a great deal of discussion and emphasis in science education research in the past decade on argumentation, this has come somewhat at the expense of a broader view of science discourse. While argumentation is clearly a critical component to the development of new knowledge in any field, there is much discipline specific discourse that falls outside of the area of argumentation. This broader use of discourse processes that we describe as sense making, is also critical to students’ development of a rich understanding of the cultural practices of science.

Complexity of Secondary Scientific Data Sources and Students’ Argumentative Discourse

This study examined the learning opportunities provided to students through the use of complex geological data supporting scientific inquiry. Through analysis of argumentative discourse in a high school Earth science classroom, uses of US Geological Survey (USGS) data were contrasted with uses of geoscience textbook data. To examine these differences, we conducted a review of frameworks for argumentation analysis, and through adaptation to the research foci of this study, developed a new analytic approach. Applying this approach to student classroom discourse revealed the affordances and constraints of both the complex USGS datasets and the filtered textbook data sources. The challenges of teaching with complex data are presented.

Understanding the Construction of a Science Storyline in a Chemistry Classroom

The purpose of this study is to consider the ways that video analysis could be used to examine the construction of a science storyline in a chemistry classroom. The participating teacher is part of a professional development group, the Invisible College for Inquiry Science Study. This group is dedicated to learning about science teaching through professional reflection, educational research, and dialogue among members. Video data are a primary tool used to achieve all of these goals. In the science unit selected, the teacher developed a storyline leading to the construction of the chemistry concept of a mole. The video analysis used different conversational units of analysis to examine how science concepts are introduced into the classroom community and evolved through dialogue among teachers and students. This analysis considered the pedagogical moves made through discourse, including dialogue around teacher demonstrations, inscriptional practices, and analogical reasoning. The theoretical approach documents how video analysis provides ways to develop teacher professional vision regarding learning opportunities in everyday classroom life.

Being in the Hot Spot: A Phenomenological Study of Two Beginning Teachers' Experiences Enacting Inquiry Science Pedagogy.

This phenomenological study demonstrates the influence that affective factors have on beginning teachers’ ability to enact inquiry science pedagogy. Through narratives shared in interviews and weblog postings, two beginning science teachers’ emotional engagement with their teaching practices, especially that of implementing inquiry-based instruction, and the resulting impact these emotions had on pedagogical choices were evidenced. Anxiety emerged as the emotion most significantly impacting participants. Through their stories, the two participants describe how their emotions and views of self-influence whether they choose to continue using inquiry pedagogy or alter their lesson to adopt more didactic forms of teaching. These emotions arise from their feelings of being comfortable teaching the content (self-efficacy), from the unpredictability of inquiry lessons (control beliefs), from how they perceive their students as viewing them (teacher identity). This research also demonstrates how intertwined these factors are, informing each other in a complex, dialectical fashion. By providing descriptions of teachers’ experiences enacting inquiry pedagogy, this study expands our understanding of factors influencing teachers’ pedagogy and provides a basis for reforms in science teacher preparation.

Taking Stock in 2015

In this issue, Marilyn Cochran-Smith provides the first of two Journal of Teacher Education (JTE) articles based on her chapter in the upcoming fifth edition of the Handbook of Research on Teaching (Cochran-Smith, Villegas, Abrams, Chavez Moreno, Mills, & Stern, in press). Her handbook chapter presents the findings from the review of 1,500 teacher education research studies published between 2000 and 2012. JTE is publishing the review in two parts. The first part, the lead article in this issue, describes the procedures and theoretical/analytical framework used in the literature review and outlines three major trends that have influenced the nature of research programs in teacher education: increased attention to teacher quality and accountability, changes in our conceptions of teacher and student learning, and changing demographics. Part 1 also presents the findings from the first of three major research programs in teacher education identified through the search--teacher preparation accountability, effectiveness, and policies. Part 2, to be published in the next issue of JTE, discusses the findings from the remaining two research programs. The first research program includes studies on alternative certification and pathways, analyses of policy trends and discourses, assessment of preservice teachers (PSTs) and/or teacher preparation programs (TPPs), and program evaluation studies. Cochran-Smiths reference in the article to her JTE editorial 10 years prior (Taking Stock in 2005; Cochran-Smith, 2005) prompted us to reflect on the contributions of JTE to advances in teacher education research in the areas identified in the first program described in the study. We comment briefly on research and issues associated with accountability, effectiveness, and policies in relation to the Cochran-Smith article and previous JTE articles published during our tenure as editors. Advances in Research on Teacher Preparation Accountability The theme of accountability has been widespread and persistent over the past 5 years, and JTE has published theme issues and articles related to the use of value-added models to determine the effectiveness of TPPs (Volume 63:5) and to examine the role of performance assessments in accountability (Volume 65:5). The articles on value-added modeling (VAM) for TPPs in the theme issue provide some support for the potential of the approach to provide feedback to policymakers and educators on the achievement of students taught by teachers in different TPPs (Gansle, Noell, & Burns, 2012; Plecki, Elfers, & Nakamura, 2012). However, the potential of using VAM for teacher preparation is diminished by the complexity and limitations of the choice of variables selected for the VAM models; the nature of the accountability criteria; the unidimensional focus on student standardized tests; decisions made about selection, estimation, and reporting; and the unintended consequences of the approach (see Floden, 2012; Goldhaber & Cowan, 2014; Henry, Kershaw, Zulli, & Smith, 2012; Lincove, Osborne, Dillon, & Mills, 2014.) The pitfalls associated with VAM make it less acceptable to educators as a high-stakes accountability measure and appear to outweigh the potential. On the other hand, performance assessment of teacher candidates (TPA) has been suggested as an alternative or addition to VAM to determine TPP effectiveness (Knight et al., 2014) and was the theme of the previous issue of JTE (Volume 65:5). While performance assessments appear to receive more support from educators as they can be used for program improvement as well as evidence for certification and licensure, problems with validity and reliability as well as questions about conceptualization of teaching and accompanying value assumptions have emerged (see Caughlan & Jiang, 2014; Duckor, Castellano, Tellez, Wihardini, & Wilson, 2014; Sato, 2014). More research is needed to address the concerns of both accountability approaches and to determine the feasibility of using a combination of VAM and TPA for high-stakes TPP accountability. …

Preservice Science Teachers’ Uses of Inscriptions in Science Teaching

This study investigated preservice science teachers’ uses of inscriptions in their peer teaching activities and was guided by the following research questions: (1) What kinds of inscriptions and inscriptional practices do preservice science teachers use in their peer teaching activity? and (2) How and for what purposes do preservice science teachers use inscriptions and inscriptional practices in their peer teaching activity? This study followed a multi-participant case study approach. Video recordings of seven preservice teachers’ lessons were analyzed for inscriptional use. Results indicate that preservice teachers used inscriptions in both pedagogical and normative ways, and the level of abstractness of inscriptions used varied across different science sub-disciplines. Our findings demonstrated that preservice teachers have multiple purposes when using inscriptions and that their purposes differ from scientists’ purposes. Preservice teachers used inscriptions: to convey final form scientific knowledge; to engage students in scientific practice; to make thinking visible; to connect multiple ideas using multiple inscriptions; and to provide data or example from nature. In addition to these purposes, preservice teachers also used inscriptions as formative assessment, to engage students in the lesson and to review at the end of a lesson. We conclude that science topics and the different purposes of the sequences of activities could be responsible for the variety of uses of inscriptions across lessons. In addition, the different uses of inscriptions may impact students’ understandings of scientists’ inscriptional practices. Implications for science teacher educators incorporating inscriptional practices in science teaching methods courses are discussed.

Five-Year Retrospective

We have just completed 5 years as editors of Journal of Teacher Education (JTE), having published four full volumes (63-66) and part of one (62), and will hand over the privilege and responsibility to a new team from Michigan State University in the next issue. In one of our first editorials (Knight et al., 2012), we reflected on how views of teacher education research from both within and outside the profession influenced our vision for the journal. At that time, we saw our challenge as building on the emerging traditions of diversity and excellence established by previous teams of capable editors with the ultimate goal of further advancing research to establish teacher education as a distinct field with knowledge, histories, research methodologies, and practices that are recognized and recognizable. Furthering the goal would require us to bring together the three dimensions of teacher education--practice, policy, and research--in challenging and productive ways so that considerations of issues or challenges in teacher education would be enriched by careful attention from these multiple frames of reference. We recognized a number of obstacles: the reputation of research in teacher education as lacking rigor and relevance and, relatedly, an incomplete knowledge base that prevents us from connecting findings in meaningful ways to inform practice and policy (e.g., Cochran-Smith & Zeichner, 2005; Feuer, Towne, & Shavelson, 2002; Kaestle, 1993; Moss et al., 2006; National Research Council, 2002; Wilson, Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2001); a lack of a sense of professional identity among teacher educators (Labaree, 2008); and publication of teacher education research in specialized content journals with limited audiences rather than in broader teacher education research journals. In reflecting on our tenure as JTE editors, we see that putting our rhetoric into reality was challenging. The sheer number of manuscripts--more than 700 per year--was overwhelming even for a relatively large editorial team with diverse expertise and interests. We made concerted efforts to address our goal of improving quality; we devoted editorials (e.g., Knight et al., 2012) to the topic of quality and led interactive sessions at the annual meetings of our sponsoring organization, the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (AACTE), to discuss what constitutes rigor in teacher education research. To address our goal of improving relevance, we sponsored major forums at AACTE meetings on current topics and solicited recommendations from teacher educators for theme issues focusing on emerging areas of interest. Teacher Education Research Quality Based on our review of manuscripts from the first year of our editorship (Volume 63), we identified four areas that authors could target to improve the quality of their research (Knight et al., 2013). The first area that we identified, appropriateness for JTE, involves an explicit connection to an important topic or issue related to research and scholarship in teacher education. We initially rejected a large number of articles prior to external review for two primary reasons: They focused on teachers, teaching, or K-12 students without a clear connection to teacher education or they used teacher education students or faculty as their sample but did not connect to relevant theory and previous methodological and empirical work in teacher education. The second and third areas involve intertwined issues related to the nature of the research design and the samples used in the studies. We received a large number of manuscripts describing studies where the researchers were also the teacher educators or program developers and implementers and the samples were their own students. Whereas this relationship is not problematic in and of itself, the genre of many of the manuscripts often appeared to be program evaluation with program improvement or validation as the primary purpose. …