Study Title: Clever teachers, clever sciences. Preparing teachers for the challenge of teaching science, mathematics and technology in 21st century Australia

Study Author: Lawrance, G.A., & Palmer, D.H.

Publication Details: Commonwealth of Australia, 2003, pp. 1-436, ISBN 0 642 77363 57 and ISBN 0 642 77375 0 (electronic version).

Summary:

What did the research aim to do?

The research aimed to explore the features of university programs that prepare new teachers for the successful instruction of mathematics, science, and technology in primary and secondary schools. It also identified innovative practices designed to improve teaching and learning.

How was the study designed?

The study used a mixed methodology comprising two literature reviews, descriptive surveys and case studies of innovative practices, with representation across different states. Details about teacher education programs (offered in 2001) were sought through structured telephone interviews to provide information on: program description; innovative practice; and challenges, constraints or difficulties. The views of non-education stakeholders were also sought regarding innovation in teacher education for the sciences, in relation to the following considerations: what constitutes innovative practice; current programs of innovative practice; and partnership with education specialists in the university. The case studies were selected based on information gleaned from the telephone interviews. The focussed review of the education research literature and result of the survey regarding opinions about university teaching innovations are discussed here.

What were the findings?

Literature review: The purpose of disciplinary knowledge for student teachers is to develop a firm knowledge base to be utilised in the development of instruction. For example, greater knowledge of science helps to make one better in teaching science (Anderson & Mitchener 1994). The following theories support the need for increasing subject matter studied by student teachers:

  • Teachers’ knowledge of content influences: what they teach; how they go about teaching it; and the content areas on which they place more intensive focus and elaboration (which are directly related to areas where they have better understanding).
  • More interactive approaches to teaching are employed by teachers with good content knowledge.
  • The depth of content knowledge possessed by the teachers influences teaching strategies (Grossman 1994).
  • Teachers with good content knowledge are more inclined to formulate high quality questions, explanations and activities for students.

Issues identified in previous research were documented as follows:

  • Serious problems have been identified in mathematics and science content knowledge of primary education student teachers. For example, many teachers have poor mathematical knowledge, despite the importance of higher-order mathematical knowledge for competent teaching.
  • Many primary teachers and student teachers dislike science (in particular, physical science), have limited science knowledge (Skamp 1992; Trumper 1998) and teach little or no science, or teach it poorly.
  • University science is usually focused on one science domain, or includes courses in general science that lack depth and rigour.

In the area of the articulation between content and pedagogical studies, Coble and Koballa Jr (1996) contend that didactic instruction in science will not lead to significant conceptual change. A constructivist approach to teaching puts high-level cognitive demands on students and empowers them to develop higher-level thinking skills (Maher & Davis 1994). Techniques in constructivist approaches include:

  • cooperative learning, which provides opportunities for sharing of ideas, testing conjectures, and realignment of thinking
  • problem solving, which facilitates and engages students in construction of meaning through an inquiry-oriented approach with applications to real-life situations
  • problem-based learning, which combines problem solving and group work, making use of real-life problems or scenarios to stimulate learning (authentic learning, involving cooperative learning techniques)
  • hands-on inquiry, which involves observing, questioning, planning, data gathering, analysing and interpreting, proposing answers, explaining and predicting, and communicating the results (Keys & Kennedy 1999)
  • integration, which helps students to make links across the curriculum, and develop situated knowledge as well as broader conceptual understanding (James et al. 2000).

In terms of the integration of teaching theory and practice, it has been reported that research over the last 20 years has revealed the following problems:

  • Goals of supervision are often unarticulated or lack concurrence with the rest of the teacher education program (Cooper 1994).
  • Teachers may be more predisposed to an apprenticeship model, which may stifle student teachers’ efforts to try new approaches i.e. the student may be unable to put into practice in their field experience their university learnings about the latest trends and innovations that are not yet widely practised.
  • University supervisors often have limited impact on the student teacher, whilst supervising teachers have a major influence as they spend more time with student teachers during the practicum. Due to this, student teachers tend to segregate theoretical and practical experiences (Graham & Thornley 2000).
  • Supervising teachers may not be high quality teachers, or may be generally unprepared or not interested in mentoring student teachers, treating them more as an aide to reduce their workload.

Descriptive surveys: Opinions and ideas about university teaching innovations were sought from Deans of Science, professional bodies and practising teachers. However, because of the low response rate, the validity and generalisability of findings, even across states, are low. Moreover, as each university has its own unique infrastructure, staffing and human resources, and constraints in terms of environment, budget, policies, resources, and cultural and social contexts, caution is needed when considering whether to implement any of the identified innovative practices in specific contexts. Some of the innovations identified though this research included:

  1. a compulsory unit in primary mathematics and environmental science
  2. science (non-education) students being sent out to school attachments to teach science as an undergraduate ‘project’ module
  3. external teaching flexibility that caters to off-campus students who are away on practicum
  4. integration of a new technology program with study at TAFE and connections to industry
  5. obtaining the assistance of education academics in outreach programs in order for primary schools to evaluate the impact of the new programs in the classroom
  6. establishment of a specialist science and mathematics school on the university campus.
  • development of new modules for primary teachers that focus on teachers’ needs and do not sacrifice academic rigour
  • flexible teaching methodologies
  • modelling of the best teaching practices in discipline units
  • increasing use of online resources
  • problem and project-based approaches incorporating interdisciplinary units at first-year level.

What conclusions were drawn from the research?

World-class training in the disciplines underpinning teaching can be attained only in universities committed to both teaching and research, and where solid infrastructure is found. Furthermore, collaborative university–school links are essential for quality pre-service education. Where institutions have consolidated partnerships in the form of school-based teacher education programs as a staff development component, one finds schools with the best practices, better quality reflection and induction, and a ‘high quality environment in which learning, teaching and supervision could flourish” (Cooper 1994). Student teachers and their mentor teachers at such schools appear to be influenced positively (Cobb 2000) and trainees are better prepared.

The diversity of programs and courses offers students a range of study options, which includes more than 100 undergraduate degree programs in Australia. Consequently, there are small cohorts located in discipline specialisations. The double degree model is being favoured in new education programs from 2002 though this trend varies amongst states. However, low enrolments in dual degree programs indicate that this is not as yet a successful innovation.

Where computer-based distance learning technology is used for teacher training, the experimental nature of science and technology subjects, which require laboratory or workshop-based activities, necessarily requires an on-site component.

Finally, better collaboration between universities and schools may prepare mentor teachers to work more effectively with student teachers. This may include: providing mentor teachers with peer-coaching techniques and other in-service skills training to improve their clinical supervision abilities; greater support in the form of improved communication regarding university expectations; and obtaining input from teachers in relation to methods, courses and teacher education programs in development at universities.

What are the implications of the study?

Although there is a diversity of innovative practices in teacher education, this study establishes that there is a range of areas to which future research and innovation can be usefully applied:

  • To improve student achievement, principals may consider entrusting a teacher to teach subjects only if they have completed specific content studies in those areas. However, some Australian schools may not be able to do this due to staffing and/or time tabling constraints.
  • Pre-service programs need to provide authentic practices and experiences, and credible role models. Also, programs should engage in student-centred instructional strategies to address the dimensions of meaningful learning, motivation and affect in order to change trainee teachers’ attitudes towards science and mathematics, and to motivate them to be enthusiastic and committed teachers.
  • If schools strengthen their collaboration with universities in relation to professional development education programs, the likely result will be best practice, high quality reflection, induction and mentor supervision.
  • Interactive, hands-on experiences are required to promote understanding of scientific concepts (Jenkins 1994), and to motivate learners to improve their scientific literacy skills. As such, it would be ideal to have a Science Centre within reach of Queensland schools. The schools may then also seek the support of the Science Centre to access facilities and organise hands-on activities for teaching certain abstract concepts.
  • The shortage of students in secondary mathematics, science and technology programs, and the limited science knowledge and poor mathematical knowledge in general of primary education teachers is a serious issue that affects student achievement in mathematical and scientific literacy. A long-term effect is that the supply and calibre of the nation’s scientists and engineers will be seriously impacted if this trend continues.

Keywords: teacher education, technology, science, mathematics