CHAPTER 35
Science Teacher Attitudes and Beliefs
North Carolina State University
When Janice, a biology teacher, enters the classroom each day, her beliefs and attitudes about science, science learning, and science teaching influence virtually every aspect of her job, including lesson planning; teaching; assessment; interactions with peers, parents, and students; as well as her professional development and the ways she will implement reform. Although this influence is not necessarily linear or obvious, attitudes and beliefs play significant roles in shaping teachers’ instructional practices.
This chapter examines the complex constructs of science teacher beliefs and attitudes and how beliefs and attitudes influence instructional practices. According to Keys and Bryan (2001), virtually every aspect of teaching is influenced by the complex web of attitudes and beliefs that teachers hold, including knowledge acquisition and interpretation, defining and selecting instructional tasks, interpreting course content, and choices of assessment. Advances in cognitive psychology have integrated attitudes and beliefs into conceptual change models as significant influences on conceptual growth and change. Putnam and Borko (1997) suggested that teachers learn as they “construct new knowledge and understandings based on what they already know and believe” (p. 1125). Although teacher attitudes and beliefs are key to understanding and reforming science education, these areas are poorly understood. Research that can unravel the complexities of teacher attitudes and belief systems is needed.
In this chapter, we summarize the historical perspectives and early research on science teacher attitudes and beliefs and present a sociocultural model. Using this model, we describe recent research studies on beliefs and attitudes. One of the consistent research findings discussed is the link between science teachers’ epistemological beliefs and their instruction. Pajares (1992) maintains that “beliefs teachers hold influence their perceptions and judgments, which, in turn affect their behavior in classrooms” (p. 307). These beliefs have been called theories of action; Kane, Sandretto, and Heath (2002) maintained that teachers’ “espoused theories of action impacts their theories-in-use” (p.188). In the sections that follow, we describe teachers’ epistemologies about science, science teaching, and science learning. This is accompanied by a discussion of the relationships of these to prior experiences, other beliefs, self-efficacy, expectancies, perceived environmental constraints, motivation, and, ultimately, instructional behaviors. In addition, we include new advances in research that document the role of the larger culture in shaping science teachers’ beliefs systems.
WHAT ARE ATTITUDES AND BELIEFS?
Emerging Constructs
Although social psychology and the study of attitudes first emerged as an investigative area in the early 1900s, theory in this area lacked cohesiveness until the 1930s. It was during the 1930s that L. L. Thurstone and G. W. Allport laid the groundwork for the emergence of this branch of psychology that focused on attitudes (Kiesler, Collins, & Miller, 1969). Allport, in his 1935 Handbook of Social Psychology, synthesized the definitions and theories of attitude into a relatively cohesive construct. Thurstone provided a rationale as well as a method for measuring attitudes; thus attitudinal studies became a way to predict and understand social change (Ostrum, 1968).
Despite Allport's attempt to unite the definitions of attitude, a universal definition was never adopted. Throughout the research literature there reside multiple definitions for the construct of attitude and several theories of attitude construction. This makes interpreting the body of literature related to teacher attitudes problematic, and the issue is compounded by the interchangeable use of the term belief with attitude.
Defining Attitudes and Beliefs
Attitude as a construct has been defined in a myriad of ways by philosophers, psychologists, researchers, and practitioners. Simpson, Koballa, Oliver, and Crawley (1994) defined an attitude as “a predisposition to respond positively or negatively to things, people, places, events, or ideas” (p. 212). In a similar fashion, Jaccard, Litardo, and Wan (1999) stated, “[A]n attitude is traditionally viewed as how favorable or unfavorable an individual feels about performing a behavior” (p. 103).
Ernest (1989) included not only positive and negative affect, but also added other characteristics, “attitudes include liking, enjoyment and interest … or their opposites … teacher's confidence … the teachers’ self-concept … valuing” (p. 24).
As researchers moved from identifying attitudes to examining beliefs as a separate construct, the distinctions became problematic. Table 35.1 shows the wide range of definitions and attributes that are used throughout the literature. Fishbein (1967) delineated attitudes from beliefs by identifying attitudes as affective constructs and beliefs as cognitive constructs. While this distinction seems to be generally accepted, the relationship between knowledge and beliefs is viewed from multiple perspectives. Smith and Siegel (2004) identified five distinct relationships of beliefs and knowledge by research communities and described them as follows. One, knowledge and beliefs are separate constructs with reciprocal impact. Two, beliefs are viewed as an integral part of schema and beliefs are subsumed in the knowledge construct. Three, knowledge and beliefs are inseparable, as they do not represent separate entities and therefore no attempt is made to distinguish between them. Four, the term belief is used to identify naïve conceptions, and the term knowledge implies the presence of scientifically accepted constructs. Five, the terms are used interchangeably with the tacit assumption that the difference will be interpreted within context of the research.
TABLE 35.1
Definitions of Belief
| Definition | Source |
| “Individuals’ thoughts are equated with belief.” (p. 331) | Southerland, Sinatra, & Mathews, 2001 |
“lay theories … images … metaphors, and webs” (p. 254) |
Bird, Anderson, Sullivan, & Swidler, 1993 |
“both evidential and nonevidential, static, emotionally-bound, organized into systems, and develop(ed) episodically” (p. 55) |
Gess-Newsome, 1999 |
“affective and subjective” (p. 335) |
Southerland, Sinatra, & Mathews, 2001 |
“deeply personal, stable, lie beyond individual control or knowledge, and are usually unaffected by persuasion.” (p. 786) |
Haney & McArthur, 2002 |
“attitudes, judgments, axioms, opinions, ideology, perceptions, conceptions, conceptual systems, preconceptions, dispositions, implicit theories, explicit theories, personal theories, internal mental processes, action theories, rules of practice, practical principles, perspectives, repertories of understanding, and social strategy” (p. 309) |
Pajares, 1992 |
“personal constructs” (p. 1) “propositions considered to be true by the individual … non-evidential as they are based on personal judgment and evaluation” (p. 2) |
Luft, Roehrig, Brooks, & Austin, 2003 |
“espoused theories of action” (p. 178) |
Kane, Sandretto, & Heath, 2002 |
“person's understanding of himself and his environment” (p. 131) |
Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975 |
“psychologically held understandings, premises or propositions about the world that are felt to be true” (p. 103) |
Richardson, 1996 |
“subjective, private opinion” (p. 227) |
Coburn, 2000 |
Regardless of the knowledge/belief perspective adopted, the cognitive and developmental views of beliefs precipitated a shift in the research focus in teacher education from attitudes to beliefs. This shift, beginning in the 1980s, is attributed to the shift in social psychology from an affective orientation to a developmental and cognitive orientation (Kane et al., 2002; Richardson, 1996). Until this time, attitude research studies were more prevalent in the science education literature than studies that focused on beliefs.
In this chapter, we situate attitudes as a component of an individual's belief system. As Fishbein (1967) noted, attitudes have an affective dimension. Beliefs, however, are integral to larger belief systems that include self-efficacy, epistemologies, attitudes, and expectations. These are all intertwined and embedded in the sociocultural context. For example, a teacher's beliefs about using cooperative learning in the science classroom cannot be separated from her beliefs about science, science teaching, science learning, her motivation, her self-efficacy, her knowledge of constraints, her knowledge of cooperative learning, her skills using cooperative learning, prior experiences, the class and school context, as well as the larger cultural contexts. Thus beliefs are part of belief systems and attitudes are components of this larger system.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES
Early Research on Attitudes and Beliefs
The initial interest in researching teachers’ attitudes was based on the underlying premise that attitudes could be used to predict teaching behavior, and that changes in attitude would result in changes in behavior. A review of the science education research literature from the 1940s through the 1970s reveals three bodies of literature related to science teacher attitudes. One body of attitude literature reported prevailing teacher attitudes about science and teaching science, and science curriculum. Elementary teachers were the focus of most of the research on teacher attitudes toward science and teaching science. Although Dutton and Stephens (1963) reported that preservice elementary teachers’ attitudes toward science were generally positive, many other surveys concluded that elementary teachers generally did not feel positive about teaching science. The sources of elementary teachers’ negative attitudes were identified as a lack of interest in science, perceived difficulty of science, lack of content and/or pedagogical content knowledge, and lack of time (Lammers, 1949; Soy, 1967; Victor, 1962; Washton, 1961; Wytias, 1962). Needs surveys during the early years revealed that elementary school teachers were also concerned about management of materials and how to excite students about science, whereas secondary school teachers reported needing to know how scientists work and the latest advances in the field (Stronk, 1974). Both elementary and secondary school teachers reported negative attitudes about having students memorize information as the emphasis of science teaching (Stronk, 1974). Other informational needs reported by secondary science teachers included where to get materials, how to motivate students, and how to select appropriate pedagogy for science teaching (Moore, 1978).
Sputnik Reform: Testing Variables
The pre-Sputnik/post-Sputnik years provide the line of demarcation in studies of teachers’ attitudes toward science curricula. Though comparably few in number, attitudes toward using “innovative practices” during the pre-Sputnik years revealed underlying concerns similar to those espoused toward the post-Sputnik curricula. Teachers cited lack of equipment and time as well as a preference for traditional curricula as reasons for negative attitudes toward change in practice (Lampkin, 1944; Sadler, 1967).
The onslaught of the National Science Foundation alphabet curricula of the late 1960s contributed to an increase in the number of studies on attitudes toward new curricula. Certain personal characteristics were found to be linked with a tendency to accept and implement the new curricula. Open-mindedness (Strawitz, 1977; Symington & Fensham, 1976), a preference for indirect and inductive teaching (James, 1971), and independent thought and action were linked to positive attitudes toward nontraditional curricula (Blankenship, 1965; Hoy & Blankenship, 1972). Less rigid control was aligned with practices advocated by Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (Jones & Blankenship, 1970). Conflicting research findings were reported on the effect of using the new curriculum on teaching practices. Hall (1970) reported that using a nontraditional curriculum did not affect teaching behaviors, whereas Orgren (1974) found that teachers changed their teaching behaviors as a result of using a new curriculum.
The second body of attitude research focused on identifying variables such as self-concept, coursework, age, cooperating teachers’ attitudes, and knowledge related to teacher attitudes about teaching science. Self-concept was found to be directly related to teacher attitudes (Campbell & Martinez-Perez, 1977). Butts and Raun (1969a, 1969b) reported that the number of science courses taken was linked to attitudes toward teaching inquiry science with fewer courses linked to more positive attitudes, whereas Douglass (1979) found that more courses were linked to more positive attitudes. Other studies examined the correlation of age with attitudes. Schwirian (1969) reported that younger teachers were more positive, whereas Shrigley and Johnson (1974) found no relationship. Cooperating teacher attitudes were not found to influence student teachers’ attitudes (James, 1971). Low correlation between teacher attitudes and knowledge was reported (Shrigley, 1974).
The third body of attitude research examined the effectiveness of interventions in affecting attitudes toward a number of variables. Role playing was used to improve attitudes toward teaching science (Hughes, 1971); essay writing generated positive attitudes toward using Bloom's taxonomy (Kauchak, 1977). Teaching process skills improved teachers’ attitudes toward using a process approach (Butts & Raun, 1969a), as well as toward teaching science (Kennedy, 1973). Recognition of the importance of process skills led elementary teachers to change their teaching practices (Bradley, Earp, & Sullivan, 1966), and modeling recommended practices produced positive attitudes toward the practices modeled (Bratt, 1977). Researchers found that preservice teacher preparation programs could affect preservice teachers’ attitudes toward teaching science (Gabel & Rubba, 1977), toward student-centered classrooms (Downs & DeLuca, 1979), and toward inquiry (Barufaldi, Huntsberger, & Lazarowitz, 1976). Using inquiry-based curricula was also found to improve attitudes toward inquiry (Lazarowitz, 1976). Researchers reported that early field experiences did not affect preservice teachers’ attitudes (Weaver, Hounshell, & Coble, 1979). Inservice workshops improved attitudes toward teaching science (Moore, 1975), toward teaching environmental education (Jaus, 1978), and toward a new curriculum (Ost, 1971) and could affect teaching practices (Mayer, Disinger, & White, 1975; Welch & Walberg, 1967). Jaus (1977) reported that microteaching was found to improve inservice teachers’ attitudes about teaching science, but Bergel (1977) found that microteaching had no effect on the attitudes of preservice teachers. In general, most of the studies indicated that planned interventions positively affected teacher attitudes, at least in the short term.
ASSESSING ATTITUDES AND BELIEFS
Quantitative Assessments
Traditional measurements of attitudes in the early research literature relied almost exclusively on quantitative methods. The most popular method of quantitatively measuring attitude was survey instruments with Likert scales where subjects ranked their level of agreement to statements with the use of a five-point scale (Behnke, 1961; Bratt, 1977; Golman, 1975; Sutman, 1969). Semantic differentials were also used to measure intensity of feeling about a statement (Butts & Raun, 1969a; Sunal, 1980). These scales were constructed by generating a series of adjective antonym pairs and placing each pair on opposite sides of a marked continuum. Respondents indicated relative attitude about a construct by placing a mark on each continuum closer to the adjective that described their feelings about the construct. Common examples of adjective antonyms used were happy-sad, interesting-dull, and harmful-helpful. Sentence completion and word associations were also used to assess teacher attitudes (Hovey, 1975; Lowery, 1966; Moyer, 1977). A few examples of qualitative methodologies for assessing attitudes, such as interviewing, were found in the literature but were used in conjunction with quantitative methodologies (Soy, 1967; Thomson & Thompson, 1975). See Pearl (1974) for a comprehensive review and critique of early attitude measurement techniques.
Qualitative Assessments
About the time research on teachers’ attitudes declined in favor of examining teachers’ beliefs, qualitative methodologies gained acceptance. This shift in research methodology reflected a movement away from a behaviorist view of the teaching-learning process and toward a more individualized and context-based approach. These qualitative assessments of attitudes and beliefs sought to understand the complex relationships among beliefs, experiences, and practices, with less emphasis on predicting and controlling teachers. Even with the growing use of qualitative methods, quantitative methodologies such as semantic differentials (DeSouza & Czerniak, 2003) were occasionally used, and Likert scale instruments (Aikenhead & Otsuji, 2000; Brown, 2000; Pedersen & McCurdy, 1992) remained a popular way for measuring attitudes and beliefs. [For examples of Likert scale instruments used to measure science teachers’ attitudes and beliefs see the following: Science Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Instrument for preservice science teachers (Enochs & Riggs, 1990), Science Attitude Scale (Thompson & Shrigley, 1986), Science Support Scale (Schwirian, 1968), Test of Science-Related Attitudes (Fraser, 1981), and Context Beliefs about Teaching Science (Lumpe, Haney, & Czerniak, 2000)].
Whereas attitude researchers have generally favored quantitative techniques, belief research methodologies have tended to be primarily qualitative. There has also been an increase in the number of research studies applying multiple data collection methods (Simmons et al., 1999; Yerrick & Hoving, 1999), though qualitative traditions have dictated selection of methodologies. Interviews have become one of the most popular ways to examine individuals’ beliefs and attitudes (Appleton & Kindt, 1999; Duffee & Aikenhead, 1992; Skamp, 2001; Tsai, 2002). Teacher biographies and journaling (Stuart & Thurlow, 2000), open-ended questions (Plucker, 1996; Windschitl, 2000), and case studies (Abell & Roth, 1992; Briscoe, 1991; Zahur, Barton, & Upadhyay, 2002) are also widely used as methods to assess attitudes and beliefs. These latter research tools have enabled researchers to go beyond simply identifying attitudes and beliefs to documenting the complex system of beliefs while shedding light on the development of belief systems within individuals. For a thorough review of the history of research on teachers’ beliefs and attitudes, see Richardson's chapter in the 1996 Handbook on Research in Teacher Education.
THEORETICAL MODELS
Predicting Behavior
Initial interest in teacher attitudes was based on a fairly simple linear model that predicted that positive attitudes toward a behavior were sufficient for implementation of that behavior. Over time, increasingly complex models have been developed to account for the multiple variables affecting decisions to engage in certain behaviors. A behaviorist frame for early attitude/belief research provided a linear model with a stimulus eliciting an attitude that in turn produced an observable response. However, research employing this model indicated a weak to modest correlation of attitudes with behavior; models grew in complexity to encompass other variables. One widely used model, the Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), suggests that behavior can be predicted from an examination of an individual's intent to perform the behavior. Intent is dependent on personal attitude toward the behavior and social influences (subjective norm) in favor of or against performing the behavior.
Another widely used model is the Theory of Planned Behavior. Whereas the Theory of Reasoned Action is limited to behaviors over which the individual has volitional control, the Theory of Planned Behavior takes into account the degree to which an individual perceives control (Ajzen, 1985, 1988; Zint, 2002). This model includes perceived behavioral control as a predictor. This variable represents the perception that an individual holds about the opportunities and resources available to perform the behavior. For example, applying this theory to environmental risk education suggests that teachers would teach environmental risk education when they have a favorable disposition toward the instruction, when they perceive social pressure to teach environmental risk education, and when they are confident that they can successfully accomplish the instruction (Zint, 2002).
SOCIOCULTURAL MODEL OF EMBEDDED BELIEF SYSTEMS
Figure 35–1 illustrates a blended theoretical framework developed by reviewing science teacher attitude and belief literature and by borrowing heavily from theoretical models of social psychology (Jaccard, Litardo, & Wan, 1999). We will use this model, the Sociocultural Model of Embedded Belief Systems, as a basis for framing recent research on science teacher attitudes and beliefs and as a tool for understanding the construction and development of beliefs and attitudes.
FIGURE 35–1. Sociocultural model of embedded belief systems.
Although the two-dimensional restrictions on illustrating the model may imply linearity of the components, this is not the intention; we acknowledge multiple reciprocal interactions. It is important to note that this model is bound by the sociocultural context of the teacher (peers, students, culture, etc.). The cyclical nature of the model denies a point of origin, but we will begin the explanation with motivation, knowledge, and skills. Here it is illustrated that knowledge and skills, as well as motivation, are prerequisites for engaging in a particular instructional practice. Although facilitating construction of knowledge and skills is complex, changing existing belief and attitude structures that underpin the motivation to engage in a set of behaviors is a daunting task.
In this model, motivation is affected by two sets of attitudes, one related to the attitudes about the instructional practice, the other related to attitudes toward implementing the practice. Each attitude set incorporates related belief systems; the relative strengths of the systems determine the strength and direction (positive or negative) of the resultant attitude. The direction and relative strength of each attitude set, defined as a disposition to act, will contribute to the strength of the motivation toward the instructional practice.
As shown in the model, science teachers’ attitudes are strongly influenced by epistemological beliefs. From an epistemological viewpoint, knowledge is socially constructed, but beliefs are individually constructed. Thus, a personal epistemology is made up of belief systems that form the perspectives with which one views a particular behavior. Science teachers’ epistemologies—which include beliefs about science, beliefs about teaching science, and beliefs about learning science—affect the type of instructional behaviors that occur in science classrooms (van Driel, Ver-loop, & de Vos, 1998). That is, science teachers’ epistemologies frame their teaching paradigms. Preservice teachers enter professional development programs with these core beliefs firmly in place (Cobern & Loving, 2002). Therefore, regardless of a teacher's place along the professional continuum, an instructional strategy perceived as incongruent with that teacher's teaching paradigm will generate a negative attitude response toward that strategy.
The level of motivation is influenced by attitudes toward instructional practices. Attitudes toward performing particular instructional practices may have a direction and a strength that are different from attitudes about these practices. For example, a study comparing the attitudes of elementary teachers in self-contained classrooms and attitudes of elementary science resource teachers revealed that although resource teachers had a more favorable attitude toward teaching science, there was no difference between the two groups in attitudes about science (Earl & Winkeljohn, 1977). Although having a positive attitude about a behavior and a negative attitude toward implementing a behavior may be interpreted as resulting from conflicts within belief systems, this model emphasizes the highly contextualized nature of instructional practices. Here the relative weights of the beliefs are highly dependent on interactions of a number of factors (Lederman, 1992; Ritchie, 1999; Strage & Bol, 1996), factors that may be overlooked in the research literature (McGuiness & Simmons, 1999). Although we acknowledge that this model of belief systems has multiple components, we have included only those variables that have been repeatedly substantiated in the research literature, including self-efficacy, perceived social norms, and context.
Self-efficacy, or beliefs about one's ability to successfully implement an instructional strategy, has been identified in several studies as a major component in the instructional decision-making process (discussed later in this chapter). Lumpe et al. (2000) outlined the multiple contributions that emerge from the possible interactions of content and efficacy beliefs and showed that decisions about practice are influenced by the relative weights of the components of the belief system.
Perceived social norms, that is, what a teacher believes is expected by others in terms of the teaching and learning process, also influence attitudes about implementing an instructional practice. Perceived environmental constraints, or physical factors that can impede success, such as lack of resources or lack of time, have been identified as underpinning this belief. Strong belief systems that lead to strong teacher identities have been shown to lessen the influence of environmental constraints (Hawkey, 1996).
The relative strengths of all these components at any given time, in any given context, can shift, producing a negative or positive attitude toward implementing the instructional practice. That is, the sociocultural environment as perceived by the teacher ultimately determines whether the instructional practice is enacted, by affecting the relative weights of the major determinants.
Once instructional behaviors are enacted, responses to teachers’ actions affect their beliefs, just as beliefs affect actions (Haney, Lumpe, Czerniak, & Egan, 2002). For example, students’ epistemologies can affect how they respond to a teacher's instruction (Laplante, 1997). If students have a traditional view of what it means to learn science, they may respond negatively to a teacher's attempt to implement a nontraditional strategy. In turn this response is filtered back through the teacher's perceptions. Whether or not the response will have an impact on a teacher's decision to continue to implement the strategy will depend on the strength of the students’ responses as well as the strength of the teacher's beliefs about the practice.
If both attitude sets are negative, then there is no motivation to implement the instructional practice, whether or not the knowledge and skills to do so are present. If one attitude is positive and the other is negative, the relative strengths of attitudes will determine whether there is motivation to undertake the task. Perceived environmental constraints, weak content background, and weak instructional skills all eliminate the possibility of alignment of practice with beliefs (King, Shumow, & Lietz, 2001). If motivation is present but knowledge and skills are not, the instructional practice will either not be enacted or will not be realized in the way it was intended (Sequeira, Leite, & Duarte, 1993).
Recent Attitude and Belief Research
The following sections describe the attitude/belief research from the 1980s to the present day. Although we made no attempt to review every research article on science teacher attitudes and beliefs over the last two decades, a cross section of studies representing research on the major mediators of teaching behavior is included. The research methodologies of the last two decades are distinctly different from earlier research. The knowledge claim shift in attitude/belief research from post-positivist to social constructivist required a shift to qualitative methodologies more suited to examining the complexity and individuality of teaching (Creswell, 2003). Data collection methods in the last two decades have centered on observations and interviews, which are most appropriate for revealing the nature of teachers’ thinking and worldviews (Richardson, 1996). Although the evaluative nature of attitudes is still acknowledged, the dynamic nature of the system in context has moved to the forefront.
The Sociocultural Model of Embedded Belief Systems frames the sections that follow. The first sections review literature on teachers’ epistemologies, sets of beliefs that contribute to the decisions teachers make about their practice. These sections are followed by sections reviewing literature on the personal and environmental constraints perceived by teachers as affecting their instructional decisions.
SCIENCE TEACHERS’ EPISTEMOLOGICAL BELIEFS
Epistemologies are sets of beliefs about knowing and learning that play a mediating role in the processing of new information. Teachers’ personal epistemologies emerge from formal and informal learning experiences and serve as mental exemplars for constructing and evaluating their own teaching practices. The research reviewed includes studies examining the origins of beliefs, the influence of belief systems on practice, epistemological shifts, and factors that contribute to belief and practice inconsistencies.
ORIGINS OF EPISTEMOLOGIES
Prospective teachers enter teacher education programs with images and models of teaching that they experienced as students (Eick & Reed, 2002; Laplante, 1997; Lortie, 1975; Southerland & Gess-Newsome, 1999). As they move through their teacher education programs, these beliefs serve as filters for new ideas (Meyer, Tabachnick, Hewson, Lemberger, & Park, 1999). That is, prospective teachers make sense of practices promoted by the preservice education curriculum in terms of their personal epistemologies. If students’ personal epistemologies are not aligned with those of the program, the outcome of instruction may be different from what had been promoted and anticipated (Bird, Anderson, Sullivan, & Swidler, 1993).
Adams and Krockover (1997) investigated the origin of the teaching and learning beliefs of four beginning science teachers. They found that one student adopted a model of teaching based on his own high school experiences. Another student's foundational experience was teaching horseback riding. The other two borrowed primarily from their experiences as teaching assistants, and all borrowed quite heavily from experiences in science content courses.
Smith (2003) examined the prior experiences of two elementary teachers who had similar backgrounds, teaching experience, and time spent teaching science and found that teachers’ experiences of learning directly affected their beliefs and practices as science teachers. For example, one of the teachers, Vicki, was not allowed to work on the farm where she grew up or spend much time out of doors. Vicki preferred learning through expository teaching and listening to information transmitted by a teacher. She learned science through courses where teachers taught with lecture and discussion and became successful at memorizing science content. The other teacher, Hannah, used constructivist practices and described her interest in science as beginning with participation in science fairs. Hannah and her family spent time together reading science tradebooks, learning to use microscopes and telescopes, and exploring the geology along a river. Hannah described her best science experiences in learning science in school as those that involved “real life” (p. 29) applications and deepened her understanding of science. Smith argued that early experiences outside of formal education may have a greater impact on teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning science than their formal education.
This significant link between prior experiences and beliefs about teaching practices has been shown in other studies. Stuart and Thurlow (2000) examined preservice teachers’ beliefs during a science and mathematics methods course and found that preservice teachers filtered their developing beliefs about teaching through their prior experiences. “I arrived at these beliefs of how students learn because … I've witnessed it in my classroom, and more importantly I've experienced it myself as a student” (p. 118). This relationship was also documented by Skamp (2001) in a study of Canadian preservice teachers who reported that their prior experiences as learners in university undergraduate science classes as well as science methods classes formed their images of good science teaching. However, Skamp observed that this changed once they began to teach in the schools. At this point, teacher education field experiences were most influential in shaping beliefs about good teaching as they saw what worked with their students.
EPISTEMOLOGIES AND SCIENCE INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES
Despite the latest reform efforts, most science teachers in the United States tend to hold epistemological beliefs aligned with a behaviorist tradition. Although professional development workshops have successfully encouraged the adoption of some constructivist strategies, the adoption of these practices does not necessarily affect the teachers’ epistemologies. For example, in 1996 a survey of K–12 teachers (N = 148) indicated that although many had adopted instructional practices aligned with constructivism, the majority did not believe that students learned by constructing their own understanding (Czerniak & Lumpe, 1996).
Taiwanese teachers have also been found to hold a traditional or transmission view of the nature of science, learning science, and teaching science. Tsai (2002) interviewed physical science teachers and found that more than half of the teachers believed that learning science is acquiring knowledge, that science provides correct answers (nature of science), and science is taught best by transferring knowledge from the teacher to the students. Less than 15 percent of the Taiwanese teachers in the study held constructivist views of learning science, teaching science, or the nature of science.
Several research studies have clearly indicated the influence of epistemologies on practice. Hashweh (1985) examined the relationship between being a constructivist teacher and the types of teaching strategies used. He found that teachers who held constructivist beliefs had a larger repertoire of teaching strategies and used strategies that would promote conceptual change.
Benson (1989) reported that epistemological beliefs at odds with a constructivist curriculum inhibited the implementation of a constructivist curriculum. A case study of two middle-grades teachers implementing a curriculum on wildlife species revealed that beliefs about learning science as a body of facts inhibited the implementation of the discovery-oriented curriculum (Cronin-Jones, 1991).
Brickhouse (1990) found that teachers’ views about how scientists construct knowledge were consistent with how they believed students should learn science. For example, one of the teachers in the study believed that scientists use scientific theories to make sense of observations and therefore believed that students should use theories to explain their observations within the science classroom. Furthermore, teachers’ beliefs about science influenced explicit lessons about the nature of science as well as the implicit curriculum about the nature of scientific knowledge. Gallagher (1991) reported that science teachers who hold positivist views of science tended to emphasize the scientific method and the objective nature of science.
Hashweh (1996) studied 35 Palestinian science teachers who described themselves as either constructivist or empiricist (as defined by a questionnaire). He found that the constructivist teachers were more likely to recognize students’ alternative conceptions and to indicate they would use a variety of teaching strategies than did empiricist teachers. Hashweh argued that constructivist teachers view the development of knowledge as residing at the student level and as a result view science as a process of conceptual change. Thus, the teachers in this study selected instructional strategies that were congruent with their beliefs about science and science learning.
A case study by Richmond and Anderson (2003) of three secondary science teacher candidates clearly revealed the influence of their epistemologies on practice. One teacher's beliefs about science as a body of facts shaped his planning and teaching. Furthermore, his focus on science as facts led him to assess low-level understanding rather than conceptual development. Another teacher viewed her primary role as a science teacher as helping students appreciate science. As a result, she spent her planning time creating an engaging instructional setting and much less time on determining if students had developed the targeted scientific understandings.
Zipf and Harrison (2003) conducted a qualitative study of two Australian elementary science teachers and examined the relationship between these teachers’ beliefs and their teaching practices. Patty, a more traditional teacher, tended to use worksheets and emphasize content in her teaching. She used the textbook in her planning to map out the content and stated, “I'm happy for the text to choose what we teach … the textbook has to be not only a student reference but the main resource for the lesson” (p. 7). Furthermore, Patty believed the textbook was the tool that allowed her to meet the wide variation in her students’ abilities: “[We need a textbook] that's got a bit of everything in it for all learners, low, middle, high ability” (p. 7). In contrast, Tina wanted to use a textbook that would support her belief in teaching relationally and would allow her “students to experience and actively participate in science” (p. 9). The differences in these two teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning were further translated into their assessment practices. Tina used open-ended formative assessments in her instructional unit to provide her with continuous feedback on student learning, whereas Patty “favored end-on marks-based assessment techniques focusing on science content and felt that she ‘must have marks’” (p. 6).
EPISTEMOLOGICAL BELIEF SYSTEMS AND CHANGE
Teachers’ epistemological beliefs tend to be relatively stable and resistant to change (Pajares, 1992). This is particularly true of experienced teachers. Luft (2001) found that an inservice program designed to promote inquiry teaching changed the beliefs of induction teachers, but changed only the practices of experienced teachers. BouJaoude (2000) used metaphors to assess preservice science teachers’ beliefs as they progressed through their teacher education program and found that the program was successful in affecting beliefs. The types of metaphors the prospective teachers used showed that 75 percent of the preservice teachers held a transmission view of teaching at the beginning of the year; this number dropped to 34 percent by the end of the year. The number of teachers who held constructivist-based views grew from 1 percent at the beginning of the year to 50 percent at the end of the year. BouJaoude also found that biology teachers were more likely to hold a transfer model of teaching than chemistry or physics teachers throughout the course of the study. Teachers’ metaphors have been used in many studies to elicit teachers’ epistemological views, because metaphors can reveal the subtle assumptions and frames that teachers apply to their practices.
Although preservice and induction teachers’ beliefs tend to be more malleable (Salish I Research Project, 1997), research has indicated that the belief systems of these groups may remain virtually unchanged, despite the constructivist traditions of their teacher education programs. Cronin-Jones and Shaw (1992) reported that preservice teachers’ beliefs remained relatively unchanged by participation in a science education program. These researchers found that their elementary and secondary preservice teachers had similar clusters of beliefs about teaching and learning both before and after their participation in a methods class.
Even if a teacher education program is successful in moving students toward a constructivist epistemology, the stability of this change is dependent on the socio-cultural context. Stofflett (1994) reported that a preservice teacher education program had successfully moved preservice science teachers from a traditional epistemology to a constructivist epistemology. However, Stofflett found that classroom practice during student teaching was not likely to be constructivist unless the cooperating teacher supported the classroom practice. In another example of sociocultural influences on instruction, Haney and McArthur (2002) conducted a case study with four preservice science teachers, examining their beliefs about constructivist practices and how consistent these beliefs were with classroom practices. They identified central or core beliefs (those that are both stated and enacted) and peripheral beliefs (those that are stated but not enacted). During student teaching, the preservice teachers whose beliefs were a mismatch with those held by their cooperating teachers had the most difficulty incorporating new beliefs into changes in teaching practices. At times, peripheral beliefs moved into core beliefs when pre-service teachers felt supported by the cooperating teacher. When peripheral beliefs were not supported, they did not move from stated beliefs to implemented beliefs.
In a large-scale research project on beginning teachers’ beliefs and practices, Simmons et al. (1999) indicated that although beginning teachers espoused a student-centered approach, perhaps as a result of their undergraduate programs, their practices were not aligned with their beliefs. They found that beginning teachers held many beliefs about science teaching and learning, and that these beliefs were not always aligned with any one belief system. The study also revealed the vacillation between beliefs that many teachers articulated in the early years, as well as the articulation of beliefs that contradicted their practices. However, by the third year, many teachers espoused the teacher-centered beliefs that aligned with their teacher-centered practices.
A survey of nine teacher education programs found that the characteristics of the program determined whether graduates of the program adopted the advocated philosophy (Tatto, 1998). The more successful programs in achieving this alignment had the following characteristics: a consistent philosophy promoted throughout the program, faculty who maintained and espoused a consistent vision, context-relevant experiences, learning cohorts, and personalized programs.
Moss and Kaufman (2003) surveyed preservice science teachers’ beliefs about classroom organization, management, and rules and found that teachers hold complex views about class management that were not supported by their philosophical and theoretical stances. Although preservice teachers may have held progressive ideas about teaching, they felt unable to implement these views in their teaching and instead focused on control and maintaining order.
Yerrick and Hoving (2003) examined preservice teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning that the teachers held while enrolled in a field-based course that focused on culturally diverse students. Prospective teachers who made changes in their instruction were reflective and engaged in the production of new knowledge of teaching. Other teachers, who were unable to make changes, tended to filter their perspectives through their own prior educational experiences. This latter group of teachers Yerrick and Hoving called “reproducers” (p. 404) because they sought to reenact their own recollected science experiences with new groups of students. These reproducers rarely mentioned student learning in their reflections and tended to focus on management of student behavior as a measurement of their success in teaching. Other prospective teachers, designated as “producers,” saw themselves as learners and recognized the need to change. These producers altered their beliefs and changed their instruction to more effective strategies.
Yerrick, Parke, and Nugent (1997) found that inservice teachers participating in a professional development workshop held traditional views on entering the workshop and left the workshop with many of these views intact. The researchers observed that teachers changed the way they talked about teaching and did indeed incorporate some of the ideas from the workshop into practice. However, the researchers noted that the participants had “rooted out” strategies that conflicted less with existing belief systems and had incorporated those ideas into their existing belief structures.
Summary
Recent attitude/belief research has revealed how individuals’ epistemological systems are constructed through their formal and informal experiences as students. These systems are extremely stable because new information is filtered through these systems and because the enactment of this system has been modeled for a number of years.
Preservice teachers’ systems seem less resistant to change, although lack of content and pedagogical knowledge may inhibit change. Inservice programs have been successful in getting teachers to assimilate new practices, but without a corresponding change in beliefs. Preservice and inservice programs should be cognizant of existing belief systems, should assist teachers with recognizing their beliefs, and should provide long-term support to newly born epistemological practices. Researchers have argued that significant changes in teachers’ instructional practices come only after there are fundamental changes in teachers’ belief systems and that these changes are not necessarily linear. Therefore, there may be a lag time between changes in beliefs and changes in practices that may not be captured by the research project. What is clear from some research is that the process of making epistemological and personal beliefs explicit is critical for professional development. Teachers may not recognize the contradiction between their beliefs and practices (Tobin & LaMaster, 1995). According to Kagan (1992), “If a program is to promote growth among novices, it must require them to make their preexisting personal beliefs explicit; it must challenge the adequacy of those beliefs; and it must give novices extended opportunities to examine, elaborate, and integrate new information into their existing belief systems” (p. 77).
BELIEF AND PRACTICE MISMATCH: CONSTRAINTS TO PRACTICE
In the previous section on epistemological change, belief-practice mismatch seemed to be a result of either the stability of the initial epistemological system or lack of support for the enacted constructivist epistemology. Many studies have substantiated belief-practice inconsistencies in other contexts, and other factors that may contribute to this mismatch have emerged.
Justi and Gilbert (2002) investigated teachers’ beliefs about the use of models and modeling for teaching science phenomena. The researchers argued that to learn science, students need to know major scientific models; to learn about science, students should understand the nature of scientific models and role of models in scientific inquiry; and to understand how to do science, students must be able to create and test their own models. Through the use of a semistructured interview with 39 Brazilian teachers (four different grade levels from primary to university), Justi and Gilbert explored teachers’ beliefs about the status and value of models in science as well as how these beliefs were translated into instructional practices. Teachers in the study noted that they believed that models could (a) make science more interesting; (b) provide a framework for explanations of phenomena; (c) make abstract concepts more understandable; (d) promote conceptual change; and (d) promote learning about the nature of science. Although the teachers in the study valued using models to help students learn science, they did not widely report using models in practice.
Part of the developmental process of moving from student to teacher involves a shift in focus from self to one's students (Jones & Vesilind, 1995). Regardless of belief systems, there is evidence that novice teachers make instructional decisions for their students based on their own needs and not their students’ needs. Peacock and Gates (2000) examined newly qualified United Kingdom teachers’ perceptions of textbook selection and use. They found that these teachers did not base their decisions about textbook use on their students’ needs but instead made decisions based on their beliefs about the demands that would be placed on them as teachers.
In a study of preservice teachers’ beliefs, Lotter (2003) examined teachers enrolled in a secondary science methods course and found that preservice teachers expressed the most concern about issues related to themselves rather than their students. These same teachers expressed positive attitudes about the value of inquiry teaching as a way to increase students’ critical thinking, motivation, ownership of science, and comprehension.
SOCIAL NORMS
Teacher beliefs are situated in the contexts of the existing social norms of the school community. Social norms influence how teachers believe their enacted practices will be perceived. For science teachers, this tension between beliefs and practices may arise when they are teaching about controversial issues such as evolution.
Elementary and secondary teachers’ beliefs about teaching science-technology-society (STS) as part of the science curriculum were investigated by Lumpe, Haney, and Czerniak (1998). Through the use of both open and closed questionnaires, teachers’ beliefs about STS were assessed within Ajzen and Madden's (1986) Theory of Planned Behavior. The questionnaires were designed to elicit teachers’ beliefs about the advantages and disadvantages of implementing STS, beliefs about who might approve or disapprove of their implementation of STS in their classroom, and factors that might encourage or discourage them from STS implementation. Teachers indicated that they believed STS would help students learn science and would assist students in applying science to their everyday lives. However, teachers were concerned about the time it takes to implement STS as part of the science curriculum. Other concerns about STS centered on teaching controversial issues as well as concerns about religious groups’ reactions to STS instruction.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Teachers may state that they hold one set of beliefs about teaching and learning while revealing their perceptions of constraints to enacting their beliefs. Collison (1993) found, as have many researchers, that teachers who reported that they did not use hands-on science indicated they could not because they lacked the materials and supplies needed.
In many cases, the contradictions between beliefs and practices arise from the perceived sociocultural context. An in-depth look at the beliefs and actions of an experienced high school science teacher revealed beliefs about teaching science that were at odds with beliefs about how students learn. Although this dichotomy in thinking was revealed to the science teacher, the teacher felt that his beliefs were aligned with practice. He explained that he was acting out his belief systems as well as he could in the context in which he was teaching (Lyons, Freitag, & Hewson, 1997). In contrast, a case study of a novice middle-grades science teacher indicated that he was aware that his beliefs about science were not aligned with his beliefs about learning science, but he felt that institutional constraints left him little time to reflect on this misalignment (Brickhouse & Bodner, 1992).
A study of Chinese teachers’ and teacher educators’ epistemological beliefs about inquiry-based learning showed that although Chinese teachers believed that inquiry-based teaching was a good way to teach science, these teachers believed there were significant barriers to implementing inquiry teaching (Zhang et al., 2003). In this study, 220 teachers and teacher educators completed a questionnaire about their constructivist and traditional views of science and science education, and 12 individual interviews were conducted to obtain more in-depth data. The Chinese science educators indicated that barriers to implementing inquiry-based teaching included the need to prepare students for the college entrance examination, which did not assess inquiry, the need for different curricular frameworks and materials for inquiry, large class size (including issues with class management), and concerns about a lack of teacher preparation to teach with inquiry.
DeSouza and Czerniak (2003) explored teachers’ intent to collaborate with other teachers to address their students’ needs and found that their perceived behavioral control was more significant than their attitudes toward the behavior. The teachers believed that collaboration to provide instruction for students from diverse backgrounds would not occur unless there was more time to collaborate, good facilities and technology, and support from colleagues.
Summary
Research has shown that teachers can believe that an instructional practice is important but, for any number of reasons, resist engaging in the practice. This contradiction may emerge as a result of lack of knowledge or because other instructional issues, such as discipline, take precedence. Also, teachers may feel that some practices are controversial and the risk of engaging in a particular instructional strategy outweighs the perceived benefits. In addition, science teachers consistently note that there are insufficient time and materials to support new practices. However, the contradictory nature of a belief/practice system may not be totally negative. Constraints, which may have appeared insurmountable, may be viewed differently if belief systems are changed (Tobin, Briscoe, & Holman, 1990). This conflict between belief and practice may produce the disequilibrium needed for change to occur.
EFFICACY, EPISTEMOLOGIES, AND TEACHING PRACTICES
Research indicates that teaching efficacy is a complex construct influenced by a number of variables. Desouza, Boone, and Yilmaz (2003) assessed 300 teachers from India, with the use of the Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument (STEBI-A) developed by Riggs and Enochs (1990). They found higher teaching efficacy for teachers who held a science degree and who spent more time teaching science each week. Interestingly, teachers with more experience were less confident of their students’ achievement (outcome expectancy) than those teachers with less experience.
There is research evidence that teachers who lack confidence about teaching a subject will give it minimal emphasis within the curriculum. This pattern is painfully evident in elementary science instruction. Jones and Levin (1994) examined elementary teachers’ attitudes toward science and science teaching and found that preservice teachers had significantly more confidence about science teaching than inservice teachers, and males had more confidence than females. The researchers also found that there was a positive relationship between the number of science courses teachers had completed and their attitudes about teaching science. Teachers who had completed three or more science courses ranked science as a higher instructional priority than teachers with fewer science courses.
Woolfolk and Hoy (1990) suggested that teaching efficacy (in a general sense) is related to teachers’ experiences managing and motivating students. Furthermore, beginning teachers’ success or failure in acting on their beliefs about student management may influence the development of a sense of efficacy. The researchers assessed 182 preservice teachers’ teaching efficacy, personal teaching efficacy, pupil control ideology, and motivational orientation (controlling or autonomous). They found that preservice teachers possessed teaching efficacy independently of personal efficacy. Personal efficacy included beliefs about responsibility for positive student outcomes and beliefs about responsibility for negative student outcomes. Woolfolk and Hoy reported that prospective teachers who had high teaching efficacy were more humanistic in relation to pupil control than those prospective teachers who were low in teaching efficacy. However, the authors noted that this was true only for prospective teachers who also had high personal efficacy and believed that they could make a difference in student achievement.
Cakiroglu and Boone (2000) explored the relationships between elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy and their conceptions of photosynthesis and inheritance. Teachers who had relatively high personal science teaching efficacy held fewer alternative conceptions related to photosynthesis. Surprisingly, the study failed to find any relationship between the number of high school and college courses completed and the number of alternative conceptions held by the prospective teachers.
Affecting Self-Efficacy
Students’ responses to instructional practices can alter teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning science. A recent study (Sweeney, Bula, & Cornett, 2001) elucidated the change in the personal practice theories of a first-year chemistry teacher from a goal of preparing future scientists to a belief that this job meant preparing scientifically literate citizens.
For teachers to believe that changes in instruction will make a difference, Bandura (1986) suggested that teachers need to have feedback, experience success, observe models of success that are credible, and be persuaded that the concerns can be overcome with positive benefits. Bandura also suggested that affective feelings that arise from success will affect the teacher's self-efficacy. Evidence for the relationship between attitudes, beliefs, and affect was found in a set of case studies of prospective elementary teachers conducted by Palmer (2002). He reported that elementary teacher candidates’ attitudes changed when they had external validation for their work, experienced success teaching children, and had a confident and supportive teacher who modeled teaching behaviors and used simple, understandable language. These factors increased the preservice teachers’ positive interest and self-efficacy.
As beginning teachers experience success, the type of support they receive may affect their self-efficacy. Luft, Roehrig, and Patterson (2003) studied three types of induction programs (general support, science-focused support, and no support) and found that teachers who participated in a science-focused induction program were more likely to implement student-centered inquiry lessons, believe in student-centered practices, and feel fewer constraints within their teaching than teachers who participated in either the general support group or did not participate in an induction group. In addition, the science-focused support group participants were more likely to use laboratories and to implement standards-based lessons than teachers in the other groups. Teachers in the no induction group held significantly more didactic beliefs about teaching than teachers in the science-focused support group. This study provided evidence that beliefs can be shaped and scaffolded by appropriate support during the early stages of learning to teach.
Knowledge and Skills
One obvious reason for the conflict between beliefs and practices as indicated in the Sociocultural Model of Embedded Belief Systems (Fig. 35–1) is a lack of knowledge and skills needed to implement the preferred practice. Not knowing how to implement a specific teaching behavior is an insurmountable roadblock to engaging in the strategy, regardless of strength of beliefs about its effectiveness. Atwater, Gardner, & Kight (1991) studied primary (K–3) urban teachers’ attitudes toward physical science and found that early-grade teachers believe that using hands-on approaches is the best way to teach physical science (100 percent), that they feel insecure about attempting to teach physical science (60 percent), and that it makes them nervous to even think about having to do a physical science experiment (84 percent). Tosun (2000) assessed prospective elementary teachers’ prior science coursework, achievement in science courses, and science teaching self-efficacy and found that prospective elementary teachers had overwhelmingly negative attitudes toward science, using terms such as “boring,” “meaningless,” “scared,” and “impossible” (p. 376) to describe their previous science coursework.
According to Tobin et al. (1990), teachers may have a misalignment of beliefs and practice without knowing how to address the mismatch. One teacher was dissatisfied with her practice and believed that science teaching should be other than what she was doing, but had no vision of practice. Through intervention she was gradually able to align her belief and practices.
In a case study of a preservice elementary teacher, Bryan and Abell (1999) observed that inconsistencies between teacher practice and vision emerged during the student teaching experience. The resulting tension between the beliefs and practice led to professional growth. The authors stated that professional knowledge emerges as a result of experience, not before experience.
Environmental Response
The link between professional growth and the belief-practice mismatch was also examined by Guskey (1986). He proposed that changes in teachers’ beliefs come only after teachers have changed their teaching practices, which results in changes in their students’ learning (the environmental response seen in the Sociocultural Model of Embedded Belief Systems, Fig. 35–1). Guskey suggested that staff development leads to changes in teachers’ classroom practices, which change students’ learning outcomes. Changes in teachers’ beliefs and attitudes follow changes in behavior. Guskey stated, “Evidence of improvement (positive change) in the learning outcomes of students generally precedes and may be a prerequisite to significant change in the beliefs and attitudes of most teachers” (p. 7). The model is based on observations that teachers believe a strategy can be successful only after they have seen it successfully work in their own classroom.
Summary
Research suggests that teachers with more science content knowledge spend more time teaching science; teachers who lack confidence tend to teach content less. In addition, teachers with greater teaching efficacy tend to be more humanistic in relation to pupil control, and teachers with high science teaching efficacy may hold fewer alternative conceptions than teachers with less science self-efficacy. A teacher's self-efficacy is influenced by responses of others to her teaching practices. Therefore, the sociocultural context may inhibit change as cooperating teachers, colleagues, administrators, parents, and students challenge practices that do not align with their vision of teaching and learning.
Teachers’ Beliefs and Educational Reform
A systems view of beliefs. As the Sociocultural Model of Embedded Belief Systems (Fig. 35–1) shows, instructional practices are influenced by a complex set of belief systems, prior knowledge, epistemologies, attitudes, knowledge, and skills. Many efforts to reform science education have come and gone with minimal impact because they failed to conceptualize reform as situated within this complex system. The emerging research on attitudes and beliefs sheds light on why reform movements have failed to have a lasting impact.
In a survey of 1000 elementary teachers (Bayer Corporation, 1995), a majority of the teachers reported that they were not knowledgeable about recommendations for the reform of science education. Only 56 percent of the respondents indicated that they were well qualified to teach science. Only a third of the teachers reported that they were scientifically literate enough to understand stories about science on TV, in newspapers, or in magazines. A majority of the teachers believed the emphasis on science education should increase and that teachers should use more hands-on science instruction and experimentation. When teachers were asked about their perceptions about obstacles to teaching hands-on science, 73 percent indicated lack of time, 70 percent indicated a lack of equipment, 51 percent felt they lacked an understanding of science, 30 percent believed their administrators did not place a priority on teaching science, and 38 percent noted they lacked interest in teaching more hands-on science.
Intent to reform: The theory of planned behavior. Feldman (2002) found that the degree to which reform curricula in physics were implemented varied greatly from teacher to teacher. To investigate this phenomenon, he compared two physics teachers with similar teaching situations and backgrounds, but with different degrees of experience in implementing the new curriculum. Both teachers indicated that they had concerns about how much time was needed to implement the new curriculum to allow for student investigation, and both indicated that they saw the potential of the new curriculum to intellectually engage and develop students’ understandings. Despite these similarities, one teacher enthusiastically embraced the new curriculum, and the other did not. Feldman concluded that many factors trigger teachers’ acceptance of a new curriculum, including epistemological stances, situational contexts, and knowledge of the epistemological basis of the curriculum.
Concerns about Reform
Haney, Czerniak, and Lumpe (1996) examined teachers’ beliefs about the state of Ohio's competency-based science model and their intent to implement the reform strands (scientific inquiry, scientific knowledge, conditions for learning science, and applications for science learning) by applying Ajzen's (1985) Theory of Planned Behavior. This theory suggests that attitude toward the behavior, the subjective norm, and the perceived behavioral control (primarily variables), accompanied by salient beliefs can predict whether a person will behave in a particular way. Salient beliefs, according to the Theory of Planned Behavior, include the extent to which an individual believes the behavior will lead to a favorable outcome, the belief that other people think the behavior should be performed, and the beliefs about the extent to which internal (ability, skill, and knowledge) and external (opportunity, cooperation, and resources) factors exist. This theory has been applied to students’ learning in science (Allen & Crawley, 1993; Crawley & Black, 1992; Crawley & Koballa, 1992) and to teachers’ intentions to engage in reflective teaching (Desouza, 1994). Haney at al. (1996) surveyed 400 teachers and found that teachers’ attitudes about implementing the reform model significantly influenced their intent to implement the model into their classroom practices. Furthermore, they found that the resources teachers believed were available (obstacles and enablers) were less important to them than their beliefs about whether the reform would have positive or negative outcomes. The teachers surveyed did not believe that significant people in their teaching environment would support their efforts to implement the Ohio reform effort, or that the available support was valuable. Female teachers in the study indicated they were more likely to implement the reform model than male teachers, and elementary teachers were more likely than middle or high school teachers.
Beck, Czerniak, and Lumpe (2000) examined Ohio elementary, middle, and high school teachers’ beliefs about implementing components of constructivism (personal relevance, crucial voice, shared control, scientific uncertainty, and student negotiation) within the Theory of Planned Behavior. Teachers who held bachelor's and master's degrees had more positive attitudes toward teaching for personal relevance than teachers who had doctoral degrees. Not surprisingly, attitude toward teaching for critical voice was a significant predictor in the study of teachers’ intent to implement critical voice in their classroom. Teachers expressed concern about the amount of time it takes to prepare and teach for personally relevant instruction as well as concerns about having to cover less content in order to teach for personal relevance. Although teachers believed that teaching for shared control can “help students take a vested interest in and ownership of their learning” (p. 336), they were concerned about students’ immaturity and inexperience in the use of shared control in learning contexts. Across grade levels, teachers were concerned about classroom management but held positive attitudes about teaching for student negotiation. Teachers believed that a lack of planning and class time was a barrier to implementing constructivist practices. Some felt that planning for constructivist teaching took too long and that it took too long for students to develop understandings of concepts.
Haney et al. (2002) selected six teachers from a National Science Foundation systemic change project in Ohio and analyzed their teaching practices in terms of self-efficacy. With the exception of one subject, teachers with higher self-efficacy tended to engage more frequently in constructivist teaching practices such as inquiry, collaborative projects, and preassessments.
Perceptions of constraints are often contextualized and situation specific, as shown in a study by Yerrick and Hoving (1999) that examined teachers’ perceptions of obstacles to their implementation of new technology. In particular, the researchers focused on teachers’ perceived behavioral control and social support. Teachers in the study received the same resources, including financial and curricular support, but differed in their implementation of the project based on their specific context. For example, one group of teachers used the new technology for real-time data collection and inquiry, whereas another group of teachers used the technology to complete traditional tasks such as looking up information or preparing presentations. Differences in implementation were accompanied by differences in perceived control and support. For example, the teachers who used technology with inquiry viewed obstacles as problems to be solved and believed their school culture supported their efforts to meaningfully implement new instructional technology. The more traditional teachers perceived obstacles as reinforcement for their beliefs that change within the school context was impossible; as a result they were unable to successfully overcome barriers for the implementation of the new technology.
Summary
Teachers have distinct beliefs about efforts to reform science education, and these beliefs shape the subsequent implementation of new innovations and reform efforts. Studies have shown that elementary teachers believe they lack time, equipment, administrative support, interest in science, as well as knowledge of science. Efforts to introduce an innovation are filtered through teachers’ beliefs about the goals and purposes of the innovation as well as the amount of time teachers perceive an innovation will require. Other studies have shown that there are differences in the implementation of reform by gender and the amount of professional preparation that a teacher has completed. Concerns about specific classroom contexts as well as beliefs about class management influence how reform is perceived by teachers. Finally, the degree to which teachers believe the school culture supports their efforts to be innovative can affect the success of reform implementation.
BELIEFS ABOUT SCIENCE EDUCATION AS A ROAD TO EMPOWERMENT AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
During the 1980s, an interest in teaching for social justice emerged from constructivist research (Creswell, 2003). Social justice researchers proposed that the primary goal of research should be the development of action agendas to address the lives of marginalized groups. The sections that follow describe the influence of teacher beliefs on teaching practices from a social/political point of view.
Controversial Issues
Teachers’ beliefs about the role of science and science instruction in the future of their students’ lives affect the topics they teach and how topics are framed within the curriculum. The teaching of controversial issues is one way that teachers promote democratic participation and social justice. An international study of teachers’ beliefs about the role of controversial issues in the teaching of science found that all of the teachers reported teaching about controversial topics in science, such as nuclear energy or global warming. Furthermore, teachers indicated that they believed this was an important part of their job, “as responsible citizens—we teachers are charged with the education of the future citizens and leaders of this country—we have an obligation, so we have to (teach) … issues such as global warming, deforestation, and rain forest” (Cross & Price, 1996, pp. 323–324). The teachers surveyed indicated that they recognized the political and economic aspects of science related to social justice, and some of the teachers felt the need to provide their students with information so they could participate democratically in the debate over controversial issues. Teachers varied in their beliefs about whether or not teachers should express their own positions in discussions of controversial issues.
Environmental education used with preservice elementary teachers has been shown to improve prospective teachers’ attitudes about science. Brown (2000) measured preservice teachers’ attitudes before and after an environmental science course and found that the course had a positive impact on preservice teachers’ attitudes about the social benefits of science and the problems that accompany scientific progress.
Empowerment through the History of Science
One way that science educators have promoted social justice and empowerment is through the inclusion of the history of science in science instruction. This position is based on beliefs that for students to become scientifically literate and capable of participating in democratic decision-making, they need to be able to understand the past complexities of science and society (Conant, 1951) as well as the conceptual, procedural, and contextual aspects of science (Klopfer, 1969). Wang and Marsh (2002) surveyed and interviewed elementary and secondary teachers to determine their beliefs about the value of the history of science and their practice in using it in their science teaching. Teachers at both elementary and secondary levels indicated that they did not believe the history of science was appropriate for elementary science instruction. The teachers who included the history of science in their teaching believed that teaching the history of science is a way to show that science is a human endeavor and helps students understand how social factors or political power are tied to science. Furthermore, some teachers used the history of science as a way to show the contributions of different cultures and to teach students about cultural heritage and diverse role models. Teachers indicated that the curriculum was overcrowded and as a consequence only incorporated history of science topics when they could be blended into the existing curriculum.
In another study, Wang and Cox-Peterson (2002) reported that elementary teachers, more than high school teachers, placed emphasis within the history of science on helping students understand the role of science in society, developing positive attitudes toward the study of science, and as a way to bring role models or diversity to students’ conceptions of science. High school teachers tended to use the history of science as a way to help students understand science content, the nature of science, and science process skills. In addition, Wang and Cox-Peterson found that although elementary, middle, and high school teachers expressed beliefs about the importance of teaching the history of science, this belief was not congruent with their instructional practices. An earlier study by King (1991) examined preservice teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning the history and philosophy of science. She found that the majority of preservice teachers thought that history and philosophy of science are important, but they “did not have a clue how to teach this way, or even enough knowledge to (in one student's words) ‘ask the right questions’” (p. 238).
Social and Community Change
Other teachers go beyond teaching a few topics to promote social change to framing their overall teaching role within the larger goal of promoting student empowerment and social change within the community. A case study of one science educator in Pakistan found that this teacher believed that science education “ought to be about empowering students to make physical and political changes in the community” (Zahur et al., 2002, p. 899). The case study showed that this Pakistani teacher believed that students’ low levels of achievement were tied to poor children's families’ lack of power and influence over the processes of schooling, and that one way to address social inequities is to provide students with knowledge of health and environmental issues. The purpose of science education for this teacher was to bring students and families together to make changes for the improvement of the society (including addressing garbage, sewage, clean water, and pollution control).
Summary
There is increasing research that explores how teachers use science teaching as a mechanism for social justice and empowerment. Teachers who view their profession as a way to make the lives of the students better use their teaching to evoke change. Studies have shown that teachers report that they believe teaching the history of science can teach students about science as a human endeavor, the social and political factors related to science, and the impact culture can have on science investigations. Other studies have shown that some teachers believe they can promote social change within the community by teaching students to address social inequities related to health and the environment.
CULTURE/CONTEXT
Some of the most insightful studies in the area of beliefs and attitudes conducted in the last decade have examined how belief systems differ across contexts and cultures. Within the Sociocultural Model of Embedded Belief Systems that we have presented (Fig. 35–1), the sociocultural context undergirds belief systems and is tied to attitudes, motivation, knowledge, and skills. By examining commonalities and differences for teachers in different instructional settings, we can better understand the situated nature of belief systems.
The High School/College Divide
Razali and Yager (1994) examined how perceptions of the importance of knowledge and skills needed by students when they enter college chemistry differed for high school and college chemistry teachers. College teachers identified students’ personal attributes as significantly more important than specific knowledge and skills. High school teachers indicated that knowledge and skills were more important for college preparation than personal attributes. Razali and Yager speculated that high school teachers have traditionally viewed the goal of secondary science as preparing students to take examinations over a prescribed syllabus, whereas the college professors seek independent learners who have attributes such as study skills, imagination, interest, creativity, and inquisitiveness.
Sociocultural Factors and Attitudes
Context emerged as the critical factor in a study of teachers’ attitudes toward the philosophy of science (Gwimbi & Monk, 2003). Teachers’ responses to a questionnaire designed to measure teachers’ views of the philosophy of science were analyzed by school affluence. The attitudes of teachers from poorer schools were significantly different from those of teachers from wealthier schools. Teachers from richer schools had more relativist and deductionist attitudes, whereas teachers from poorer schools were more positivist and inductivist. Gwimbi and Monk noted that, although the richer schools were able to hire better qualified teachers, the school context reinforced the differential distribution of attitudes. The researchers maintained that teachers teach the way they do not because of how they think, but instead because of where they work.
Cross-Country Contexts
Studies of teachers from different countries have shown that the impact of teacher education is influenced by the beliefs and values of the larger culture. Through the use of questionnaires and interviews, Thompson and Orion (1999) compared pre-service teachers’ attitudes and perceptions from Israel and England/Wales during and at the end of the teacher education programs. Teachers from both regions initially had similar reasons for wanting to teach, and both groups changed their views about science education after the program. The British teachers held a more pupil-oriented approach to teaching science and management than the Israeli teachers. However, the Israeli teachers held a more progressive view of the socializing aspects of education than the British teachers. Both groups were overconfident and underestimated the complexity of skills needed to be a successful teacher. Thompson and Orion noted that teaching is held in higher status in England and Wales than in Israel. In addition, approximately 75 percent of Israeli teachers were female, whereas only 40 percent of English teachers were female. Salaries were also lower in Israel, where teaching is sometimes viewed as a secondary wage for women whose spouses provide the primary support for the family.
Egyptian, Korean, and United Kingdom teachers’ attitudes about the aims of practical work in science education were studied by Swain, Monk, and Johnson (1999). When UK teachers were compared with Korean teachers, the Korean teachers valued practical work for finding facts and arriving at new principles, as a creative activity, to verify facts, to elucidate theoretical work, and to help remember facts and principles more than UK teachers. The UK teachers rated practical work as more important for seeing problems and seeking new ways to solve them, promoting a logical reasoning method of thought, developing an ability to cooperate, and developing a critical attitude. The Korean teachers viewed the practical as content-focused and fact-oriented. The UK teachers viewed science as more focused on investigating problems and manufacturing new knowledge. Egyptian teachers, when compared with UK teachers, tended to view practical work as important as a creative activity focused on developing self-reliance and giving students experience with standard techniques. Overall, Korean teachers tended to have a positivistic approach to science. The researchers linked the teachers’ attitudes to their work conditions and suggested that the Egyptian teachers’ large classes, limited equipment, and restrictive curriculum affected their views of practical experiences. For the Korean teachers, the researchers suggested that the habit of competition and emphasis on factual knowledge dominated their perspectives on practical work. According to the researchers, the UK teachers’ perspectives were shaped by their concerns about doing investigations. For these teachers from three different countries, their attitudes appeared to be shaped by their cultural context and conditions of work.
Aikenhead and Otsuji (2000) examined Canadian and Japanese teachers’ perceptions of science, science and culture, everyday knowledge, and teaching and learning science. Using a Likert scale assessment instrument, the researchers found that Canadian teachers held a more reductionist view of science than their Japanese counterparts, who viewed science and nature as one entity, including themselves as part of nature. Furthermore, more Japanese teachers than Canadian teachers believed school science was reflected in the local culture. Aikenhead and Otsuji found that neither set of teachers seemed aware of the cultural clashes that students experience in the typical science classroom. Similarly, Plucker (1996) found that although teachers were concerned about gender inequity for their students, they were generally not familiar with the range of possible causes (including their own behavior).
Religion, Beliefs, and Instructional Practices
A teacher's religious beliefs as well as the cultural beliefs of the society affect how instruction is framed and interpreted. Haidar (1999) examined United Arab Emirates preservice and inservice teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science through the use of a questionnaire in which participants responded to items on a continuum from traditional to constructivist views. Traditional views were held by teachers for the role of a scientist, constructivist views were held for scientific knowledge, and mixed perspectives were held about scientific theories, scientific method, and scientific laws. Haidar speculated that the mixed views emerge from the teachers’ Islamic beliefs: “The purpose of science is to discover God's wisdom in the universe; knowledge can be acquired by the scientific method as well as by other means … truth is not absolute, we see only what God permits us to see; and the only absolute truth is what God knows” (Haidar, 1999, p. 808).
The teachers’ Islamic beliefs were also influenced by historical perspectives from the 1960s and 1970s, when government officials viewed science as a way to fight ignorance, imperialism, and underdevelopment and officials encouraged citizens to adopt science as a way to promote development. According to Haidar, teachers’ constructivist views were congruent with Islamic views, suggesting that the scientific method is not the only way to gain knowledge and knowledge is “only humanity's best effort to understand the world” (p. 818).
Summary
The growing research that examines belief systems across cultures and contexts has highlighted the power of contextual influences on teachers’ beliefs. Contexts, such as level of schooling (high school versus higher education) or wealth of the school community, have been associated with differences in teachers’ attitudes and beliefs. Other studies compared beliefs of teachers from different countries and have shown that culture plays a powerful role in shaping beliefs about teaching strategies and approaches. Finally, a teacher's religious beliefs may frame a teacher's views of the goals and nature of science. These cultural and contextual studies have begun to provide a richer view of teachers’ attitudes and beliefs while highlighting differences across teachers in different contexts.
CONCLUSIONS
There has been consistent acknowledgment of the importance of science teachers’ attitudes and beliefs over the decades. However, the initial model for examining attitudes was a simplistic cause-and-effect model. Situated in a behaviorist framework, this research noted relationships between variables without gaining insight into the development of attitudes across time and without understanding how the larger cultural context influenced the development of attitudes. Over the years, the model has become more complex as research findings have elucidated the myriad of variables likely to affect a teacher's instructional practices.
The vast majority of research has focused only on one particular aspect of the decision-making process, making it difficult to construct a cohesive picture of the research. Significant to understanding teachers’ instructional practices is the socio-cultural context, the importance of which has recently been recognized. The research to date provides evidence of the complexity of the decision-making process in instructional settings and the critical role of teacher beliefs in reforming science education.
Much of the current research about beliefs has focused on individual teachers or small groups of teachers in case-study or ethnographic formats. Although these have been valuable in informing the science education community about the complexity of belief systems, future research is needed that can include larger samples, such as the study by Simmons et al. (1999). There is emerging evidence that patterns in belief systems can be identified across cultures and contexts. Further research is needed that examines beliefs across subcultures, as well as developmental trends as teachers move along the novice-to-expert continuum. Studies that can cross the boundaries of different countries to explore commonalities across teachers have the potential to inform us about the underlying structures of teacher belief systems as well as strategies that can be effective in promoting teacher development across subpopulations. This new generation of research on teacher belief studies is crucial to promoting growth and sustaining reform within science education.
Research highlighted in this chapter has shown that teachers’ belief systems influence their attitudes. Studies have shown that teachers’ content knowledge, confidence, self-efficacy, experience, and social context are linked to belief systems and practices. Teachers’ epistemological beliefs about the nature of science, science learning, and science teaching further affect these belief systems, attitudes, and practices. Furthermore, research has shown that these complex belief systems influence how teachers interact with students, the strategies they use for instruction, their classroom management systems, their selection of topics and subtopics, and their assessment practices. As teachers try new instructional methods, the responses of those in the educational environment further influence their perceptions and their belief systems. It is becoming increasingly clear that teachers’ belief systems are embedded in the larger sociocultural environment, which includes students, peer teachers, parents, administrators, families, communities, and political/government environments.
FUTURE RESEARCH
The study of teachers’ beliefs is in its infancy, and there are numerous areas yet to be researched. It is not clear how epistemological assumptions and patterns of reasoning may differ for individuals across content domains, and whether there is a developmental relationship between epistemologies and beliefs within a domain (Hofer & Pintrich, 1997).
The differences in elementary and secondary teachers’ views about science and science teaching persist across programs and contexts. What experiences contribute to these differences across teachers? What factors influence an individual to enter elementary education versus secondary education? Are there dispositions or abilities that encourage a teacher to select one area over another? How do attitudes and belief systems influence dispositions or abilities (or vice versa) if they do exist? Are there differences in biology and chemistry teachers’ attitudes, as BouJaoude (2000) has suggested? If content differences exist, what contributes to the development of these differences?
The growing diversity of student populations necessitates an understanding of how teachers’ beliefs about culturally diverse students affect their interactions and instruction (Bryan & Atwater, 2002). How can we make teachers’ beliefs about culturally diverse students explicit to become a tool for professional and personal growth?
There is only limited research that explores whether teachers’ and students’ attitudes and beliefs differ. If teachers hold beliefs and attitudes that are different from those of their students, does this difference affect student learning? In one of the few studies in this area, Cary and Smith (1993) explored the challenges of teachers’ use of a constructivist approach to science that were at odds with students’ objectivist views of science. If teachers’ and students’ views of science differ year after year, how does this affect students’ development?
Pajares (1992) and DeSouza and Czerniak (2003) have suggested that confidence involves both personal and social components—including classrooms, teacher teams, schools, and school districts—and that together these contribute to a sense of collective efficacy. We know that attitudes and beliefs are influenced by significant other people in our environments. How systems of beliefs situated within individuals and the greater sociocultural context contribute to teachers’ attitudes about teaching and learning can inform the teacher development process has yet to be researched.
Although most researchers accept that there is a strong link between teachers’ beliefs and teaching practices, research that documents how changes in beliefs subsequently affect teaching behaviors is limited (Hashweh, 1996). Where in the complex model of beliefs do changes make the most impact in instructional practice? Ediger (2002) argued for measuring preservice teachers’ attitudes toward science as a way to ensure that teachers have the qualifications to be good science teachers. What would these types of assessments look like? Can we really measure attitudes and beliefs in a valid way? What are the ethical implications of making decisions about teacher education candidates based on their beliefs?
For decades, despite reform efforts, traditional teaching has maintained a strong foothold in our science classrooms. The literature suggests that some teachers believe that traditional methods are most effective for teaching science. However, a great number of teachers hold a vision of science teaching that is aligned with national standards, but do not enact this vision in the classroom. Some lack content knowledge and so avoid teaching science. Some lack pedagogical skills, such as maintaining classroom discipline, which limits their ability to effectively teach science. Others lack pedagogical content knowledge and are unsure about how to implement an inquiry lesson or how to lead a class discussion to make sense of data. The task of addressing these issues seems easier than addressing the attitudes and beliefs which inhibit student-centered practices. The most significant contribution of attitude/belief research would lead to developmentally sequenced preservice, induction, and professional development programs, so that knowledge and skills are given sufficient time and support to develop. Additionally, these programs would be structured to acknowledge and address environmental constraints. And most importantly, these programs would make salient for teachers their own attitude beliefs systems as well as the complex factors that contribute to the development of these systems.
Our definitions of ourselves as science teachers (and learners) is bound to our belief systems, epistemologies, prior experiences, motivation, knowledge, and skills. These factors are all linked to each other with reciprocal influence and are embedded in the larger sociocultural environment. Only through further research that can take a systems view of attitudes and beliefs can we truly understand how attitudes and beliefs shape instructional practice and use this knowledge to achieve reform.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Thanks to Lynn Bryan and J. M. Shireen DeSouza, who reviewed this chapter.
REFERENCES
Abell, S. K., & Roth, M. (1992). Constraints to teaching elementary science: A case study of a science enthusiast student teacher. Science Education, 76, 581–595.
Adams, P. E., & Krockover, G. H. (1997). Beginning secondary teacher cognition and its origins in the preservice secondary science teacher program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 633–653.
Aikenhead, G. S., & Otsuji, H. (2000). Japanese and Canadian science teachers’ views on science and culture. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 277–299.
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality and behavior. Chicago: Dorsey.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 453–474.
Allen, N., & Crawley, F. (1993, April). Understanding motivation to achieve in science using rational decision-making, motivation, and choice-framing theories. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta.
Appleton, K., & Kindt, I. (1999). Why teach primary science? Influences on beginning teachers’ practices. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 155–168.
Atwater, M., Gardner, C., & Kight, C. (1991). Beliefs and attitudes of urban primary teachers toward physical science and teaching physical science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 3, 3–12.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of action and thought: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Barufaldi, J. P., Huntsberger, J. P., & Lazarowitz, R. (1976). Changes in attitudes of preservice elementary education majors toward inquiry teaching strategies. School Science and Mathematics, 76, 420–424.
Bayer Corporation. (1995). The Bayer facts of science education: An assessment of elementary school parent and teacher attitudes toward science education: An executive summary. Pittsburgh: Bayer Corporation.
Beck, J., Czerniak, C., & Lumpe, A. (2000). An exploratory study of teachers’ beliefs regarding the implementation of constructivism in their classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 323–343.
Behnke, F. L. (1961). Reactions of scientists and science teachers to statements bearing on certain aspects of science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 61, 193–207.
Benson, G. D. (1989). Epistemology and science curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21, 329–344.
Bergel, S. P. (1977). The effects of microteaching on the attitudes of preservice elementary teachers towards teaching science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University.
Bird, T., Anderson, L. M., Sullivan, B. A., & Swidler, S. A. (1993). Pedagogical balancing acts: A teacher educator encounters problems in an attempt to influence prospective teachers’ beliefs. Teacher and Teacher Education, 9, 253–267.
Blankenship, J. W. (1965). Biology teachers and their attitudes concerning BSCS. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3, 54–60.
BouJaoude, S. (2000). Conceptions of science teaching revealed by metaphors and by answers to open-ended questions. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 173–186.
Bradley, R. C., Earp, N. W., & Sullivan, T. (1966). A review of fifty years of science teaching and its implications. Science Education, 50, 152–155.
Bratt, H. M. (1977). An investigation of two methods of science instruction and teacher attitudes toward science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14, 533–538.
Brickhouse, N. (1990). Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41, 53–62.
Brickhouse, N., & Bodner, G. (1992). The beginning science teacher: Classroom narratives of convictions and constraints. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 471–486.
Briscoe, C. (1991). The dynamic interactions among beliefs, role metaphors, and teaching practices: A case study of teacher change. Science Education, 75, 185–199.
Brown, F. (2000). The effect of an inquiry-oriented environmental science course on preservice elementary teachers’ attitudes about science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 12(2), 1–6.
Bryan, L. A., & Abell, S. K. (1999). The development of professional knowledge in learning to teach science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 121–139.
Bryan, L. A., & Atwater, M. M. (2002). Teacher beliefs and cultural models: A challenge for science teacher preparation programs. Science Education, 86, 821–839.
Butts, D., & Raun, C. E. (1969a). A study in teacher attitude change. Science Education, 53, 101–104.
Butts, D., & Raun, C. E. (1969b). A study of teacher change. Science Education, 53, 3–8.
Cakiroglu, J., & Boone, W. (2000). Preservice elementary teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and their conceptions of photosynthesis and inheritance. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 14, 1–14.
Campbell, R. L., & Martinez-Perez, L. (1977). Self concept and attitude as factors in the achievement of preservice teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14, 455–460.
Cary, S., & Smith, C. (1993). On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 28, 235–251.
Cobern, W. W., & Loving, C. C. (2002). Investigation of preservice elementary teachers’ thinking about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 1016–1031.
Coburn, W. (2000). The nature of science and the role of knowledge and belief. Science and Education, 9, 219–246.
Collison, G. E. (1993). Teacher attitudes toward hands-on science instruction versus traditional teaching methods (Eric Document Reproduction Service no. ED380271).
Conant, J. (1951). On understanding science: An historical approach. New York: New American Library.
Crawley, F., & Black, C. (1992). Causal modeling of secondary science students’ intentions to enroll in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 585–599.
Crawley, F., & Koballa, T. (1992, March). Attitude/behavior change in science education: Part I—models and methods. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Boston.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cronin-Jones, L. L. (1991). Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curriculum implementation: Two case studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 235–250.
Cronin-Jones, L. L., & Shaw, L. E., Jr. (1992). The influence of methods instruction on the beliefs of prospective elementary and secondary science teachers: Preliminary comparative analysis. School Science and Mathematics, 92, 14–22.
Cross, R. T., & Price, R. F. (1996). Science teachers’ social conscience and the role of controversial issues in the teaching of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 319–333.
Czerniak, C., & Lumpe, A. (1996). Relationship between teacher beliefs and science education reform. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7, 247–266.
DeSouza, J., Boone, W., & Yilmaz, O. (2003, March). Science teaching self-efficacy and outcome expectancy beliefs of teachers in southern India. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia.
DeSouza, J., & Czerniak, C. (2003). Study of science teachers’ attitudes toward beliefs about collaborative reflective practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14, 75–96.
Desouza, S. (1994). Do science teachers intend to engage in collaborative reflective practice? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Anaheim, CA.
Douglass, C. B. (1979). Differences in attitude and ability of biology majors, nonmajors, and pre-service teachers. Improving College and University Teaching, 27(3), 110–113.
Downs, G. E., & DeLuca, F. P. (1979). Effect of a four-year elementary teacher preparation program on undergraduates’ preferences for teaching science. Science Education, 63, 45–52.
Duffee, L., & Aikenhead, G. (1992). Curriculum change, student evaluation, and teacher practical knowledge. Science Education, 76, 493–506.
Dutton, W. H., & Stephens, L. (1963). Measuring attitudes toward science. School Science and Mathematics, 63, 43–49.
Earl, R. D., & Winkeljohn, D. R. (1977). Attitudes of elementary teachers toward science and science teaching. Science Education, 61, 41–45.
Ediger, M. (2002). Assessing teacher attitudes in teaching science. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29(1), 25–29.
Eick, C. J., & Reed, C. J. (2002). What makes an inquiry-oriented science teacher? The influence of learning histories on student teacher role identity and practice. Science Education, 86, 401–416.
Enochs, L., & Riggs, I. (1990). Further development of an elementary science teaching efficacy beliefs instrument: A preservice elementary scale. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 695–706.
Ernest, P. (1989). The knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: A model. Journal of Education for Teaching, 15, 13–33.
Feldman, A. (2002). Multiple perspectives for the study of teaching: Knowledge, reason, understanding, and being. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 1032–1055.
Fishbein, M. (1967). A consideration of beliefs and their role in attitude measurement. In M. Fish-bein (Ed.), Readings in attitude theory and measurement (pp. 257–266). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fraser, B. J. (1981). Test of science-related attitudes. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Gabel, D. L., & Rubba, P. A. (1977). The effect of early teaching and teaching experience on physics achievement, attitude toward science and science teaching and process skill efficiency. Science Education, 61, 503–511.
Gallagher, J. J. (1991). Prospective and practicing secondary school science teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 121–133.
Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and its impact on instruction. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implication for science education (pp. 51–94). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Golman, M. E. (1975). Assessing teaching opinions of pre-service science teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 75, 338–342.
Guskey, T. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15, 5–12.
Gwimbi, E., & Monk, M. (2003). A study of the association of attitudes to the philosophy of science with classroom contexts, academic qualification and professional training, amongst A level biology teachers in Harare, Zimbabwe. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 469–488.
Hairdar, A. (1999). Emirates pre-service and in-service teachers’ views about the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 807–822.
Hall, G. E. (1970). Teacher-pupil behaviors exhibited by two groups of second grade teachers using science—A process approach. Science Education, 54, 325–334.
Haney, J. J., Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation of science education reform strands. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 971–993.
Haney, J. J., Lumpe, A. T., Czerniak, C. M., & Egan, V. (2002). From beliefs to actions: The beliefs and actions of teachers implementing change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 171–187.
Haney, J. J., & McArthur, J. (2002). Four case studies of prospective science teachers’ beliefs concerning constructivist teaching practices. Science Education, 86, 783–802.
Hashweh, M. Z. (1985). An exploratory study of teacher knowledge and teaching: The effects of science teachers’ knowledge of subject-matter and their conceptions of learning on their teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
Hashweh, M. Z. (1996). Effects of science teachers’ epistemological beliefs in teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 47–64.
Hawkey, K. (1996). Image and the pressure to conform in learning to teach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 99–108.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.
Hovey, L. M. (1975). Design of an instrument to measure teachers’ attitudes toward experimenting. School Science and Mathematics, 75, 167–172.
Hoy, W. K., & Blankenship, J. W. (1972). A comparison of the ideological orientations and personality characteristics of teacher acceptors and rejecters. Science Education, 56, 71–77.
Hughes, E. F. (1971). Role playing as a technique for developing a scientific attitude in elementary teacher trainees. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8, 113–122.
Jaccard, J., Litardo, H. A., & Wan, C. K. (1999). Subjective culture and social behavior. In J. Adamopoulos & Y. Kashima (Eds.), Social psychology and cultural context (pp. 95–106). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
James, H. (1971). Attitudes and attitude change: Its influence upon teaching behavior. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8, 351–356.
Jaus, H. H. (1977). Using microteaching to change elementary teachers’ attitudes toward science instruction. School Science and Mathematics, 77, 402–406.
Jaus, H. H. (1978). The effect of environmental education instruction on teachers’ attitudes toward teaching environmental education. Science Education, 62, 79–84.
Jones, C., & Levin, J. (1994). Primary/elementary teachers’ attitudes toward science in four areas related to gender differences in students’ performance. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 6, 46–66.
Jones, M. G., & Vesilind, E. M. (1995). Preservice teachers’ development of a cognitive framework for class management. Teacher Education, 11, 313–330.
Jones, P., & Blankenship, J. W. (1970). A correlation of biology teachers’ pupil control ideology and their classroom teaching practices. Science Education, 54, 263–265.
Justi, R. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Science teachers’ knowledge about and attitudes towards the use of models and modeling in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1273–1292.
Kagan, D. (1992). Implications of research on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist, 27, 65–90.
Kane, R., Sandretto, S., & Heath, C. (2002). Telling half the story: A critical review of research on the teaching beliefs and practices of university academics. Review of Educational Research, 72, 177–228.
Kauchak, D. P. (1977). The effect of essay writing on the attitudes of undergraduate methods students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14, 139–143.
Kennedy, T. G. (1973). The effect of process approach instruction upon changing pre-service elementary teachers’ attitudes toward science. School Science and Mathematics, 73, 569–574.
Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 631–645.
Kiesler, C. A., Collins, B. E., & Miller, N. (1969). Attitude change: A critical analysis of theoretical approaches. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
King, B. (1991). Beginning teachers’ knowledge of and attitudes toward history and philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 135–141.
King, K., Shumow, L., & Lietz, S. (2001). Science education in an urban elementary school: Case studies of teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices. Science Education, 85, 89–110.
Klopfer, L. (1969). The teaching of science and the history of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 87–95.
Lammers, T. J. (1949). One hundred interviews with elementary school teachers concerning science education. Science Education, 33, 292–295.
Lampkin, R. H. (1944). Do teachers consider suggestions for teaching. Science Education, 28, 219–222.
Laplante, B. (1997). Teachers’ beliefs and instructional strategies in science: Pushing analysis further. Science Education, 81, 277–294.
Lazarowitz, R. (1976). Does use of curriculum change teachers’ attitudes toward inquiry? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13, 547–552.
Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions on the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331–360.
Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lotter, C. (2003, March). Preservice science teachers’ concerns through classroom observations and student teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia.
Lowery, L. F. (1966). Development of an attitude measuring instrument for science education. School Science and Mathematics, 66, 494–502.
Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: The impact of an inquiry-based professional development programmed on beginning and experienced secondary teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 517–534.
Luft, J., Roehrig, G., Brooks, T., & Austin, B. (2003, March). Exploring the beliefs of secondary science teachers through interview maps. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia.
Luft, J., Roehrig, G., & Patterson, N. (2003). Contrasting landscapes: A comparison of the impact of different induction programs on beginning secondary science teachers’ practices, beliefs, and experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 77–97.
Lumpe, A., Haney, J., & Czerniak, C. (1998). Science teacher beliefs and intentions to implement science-technology-society (STS) in the classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9, 1–24.
Lumpe, A., Haney, J. J., & Czerniak, C. (2000). Assessing teachers’ beliefs about their science teaching context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 275–292.
Lyons, L. L., Freitag, P. K., & Hewson, P. W. (1997). Dichotomy in thinking: Researcher and teacher perspectives on a chemistry teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 239–254.
Mayer, V. J., Disinger, J. F., & White, A. L. (1975). Evaluation of an inservice program for earth science teachers. Science Education, 59, 145–153.
McGuiness, J. R., & Simmons, P. (1999). Teachers’ perspectives of teaching science-technology-society in local cultures: A sociocultural analysis. Science Education, 83, 179–212.
Meyer, H., Tabachnick, B. R., Hewson, P. W., Lemberger, J., & Park, H.-J. (1999). Relationships between prospective elementary teachers’ classroom practice and their conceptions of biology and of teaching science. Science Education, 83, 323–346.
Moore, K. (1978). An assessment of secondary science teacher needs. Science Education, 62, 339–348.
Moore, R. (1975). A two-year study of a CCSS group's attitudes toward science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 75, 288–290.
Moss, D. M., & Kaufman, D. (2003, March). Examining preservice science teachers’ conception of classroom management. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia.
Moyer, R. (1977). Environmental attitude assessment: Another approach. Science Education, 61, 347–356.
Orgren, J. (1974). Using an interaction analysis instrument to measure the effect on teaching behavior of adopting a new science curriculum. Science Education, 58, 431–436.
Ost, D. H. (1971). An evaluation of an institute for teachers of secondary school biology. American Biology Teacher, 33, 546–548.
Ostrum, T. M. (1968). The emergence of attitude theory: 1930–1950. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, & T. M. Ostrum (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 1–28). New York: Academic Press.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.
Palmer, D. (2002). Factors contributing to attitude exchange amongst preservice elementary teachers. Science Education, 86, 122–138.
Peacock, A., & Gates, S. (2000). Newly qualified primary teachers’ perceptions of the role of text material in teaching science. Research in Science & Technology, 18, 155–170.
Pearl, R. E. (1974). The present status of science attitude measurement: History, theory and availability of measurement instruments. School Science and Mathematics, 74, 375–379.
Pedersen, J. E., & McCurdy, D. W. (1992). The effects of hands-on, minds-on teaching experiences on attitudes of preservice elementary teachers. Science Education, 76, 141–146.
Plucker, J. A. (1996). Secondary science and mathematics teachers and gender equity: Attitudes and attempted interventions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 737–751.
Putnam, R., & Borko, H. (1997). Teacher learning: Implications of new views of cognition. In B. J. Biddle, T. L. Good, & I. F. Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of teachers and teaching (pp. 1223–1296). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic.
Razali, S. N., & Yager, R. E. (1994). What college chemistry instructors and high school chemistry teachers perceive as important for incoming college students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 735–747.
Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 102–119). New York: Simon & Schuster and Macmillan.
Richmond, G., & Anderson, C. (2003, March). The nature of tensions between educator and teacher candidate beliefs about science teaching practice. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia.
Riggs, I., & Enochs, L. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary science teachers’ science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625–635.
Ritchie, S. M. (1999). The craft of intervention: A personal practical theory for a teacher's within-group interactions. Science Education, 83, 213–232.
Sadler, P. M. (1967). Teacher personality characteristics and attitudes concerning PSSC Physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 28–29.
Salish I Research Project. (1997). Secondary science and mathematics teacher preparation programs: Influences on new teachers and their students. Final Report to the Department of Education, Science Education Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
Schwirian, P. M. (1968). On measuring attitudes toward science. Science Education, 52, 172–179.
Schwirian, P. M. (1969). Characteristics of elementary teachers related to attitudes toward science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 203–213.
Sequeira, M., Leite, L., & Duarte, M. (1993). Portuguese science teachers’ education, attitudes, and practice relative to the issue of alternative conceptions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 845–856.
Shrigley, R. L. (1974). The correlation of science attitudes and science knowledge of preservice elementary teachers. Science Education, 58, 143–151.
Shrigley, R. L., & Johnson, T. M. (1974). The attitude of inservice elementary teachers toward science. School Science and Mathematics, 74, 437–446.
Simmons, P., Emory, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., Crockett, D., et al. (1999). Beginning teachers: Beliefs and classroom actions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 930–954.
Simpson, R. D., Koballa, T. R., Oliver, J. S., & Crawley, F. (1994). Research on the affective dimension of science learning. In D. Gable (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 211–234). New York: Macmillan.
Skamp, K. (2001). A longitudinal study of the influences of primary and secondary school, university and practicum on student teachers’ images of effective primary science practice. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 227–245.
Smith, L. (2003, April). The impact of early life history on teachers’ beliefs: In-school and out-of-school experiences as learners and knowers of science. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago.
Smith, M. U., & Siegel, H. (2004). Knowing, believing, and understanding: The goals of science education? Science Education, 13, 553–582.
Southerland, S. A., & Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Preservice teachers’ views of inclusive science teaching as shaped by images of teaching, learning and knowledge. Science Education, 83, 131–150.
Southerland, S., Sinatra, G., & Mathews, M. (2001). Educational Psychology Review, 133, 325–351.
Soy, E. M. (1967). Attitudes of prospective elementary teachers toward science as a field of specialty. School Science and Mathematics, 67, 507–517.
Stofflett, R. T. (1994). The accommodation of science pedagogical knowledge: The application of conceptual change constructs to teacher education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 787–810.
Strage, A., & Bol, L. (1996). High school biology: What makes it a challenge for teachers? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 753–772.
Strawitz, B. (1977). Open-mindedness and attitudes about teaching science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14, 545–549.
Stronk, D. R. (1974). The attitudes and needs of inservice science teachers. Science Education, 58, 505–508.
Stuart, C., & Thurlow, D. (2000). Making it their own: Preservice teachers’ experiences, beliefs, and classroom practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 113–121.
Sunal, D. W. (1980). Relationship of affective measures and preservice teaching behavior. Science Education, 64, 337–347.
Sutman, F. X. (1969). The development, field test and validation of an inventory of scientific attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 7, 85–93.
Swain, J., Monk, M., & Johnson, S. (1999). A comparative study of attitudes to the aims of practical work in science education in Egypt, Korea and the UK. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1311–1324.
Sweeney, A. E., Bula, O. A., & Cornett, J. W. (2001). The role of personal practice theories in the professional development of a beginning high school chemistry teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 408–441.
Symington, D. J., & Fensham, P. J. (1976). Elementary school teachers’ close mindedness, attitude toward science and congruence with a new curriculum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13, 441–447.
Tatto, M. T. (1998). The influence of teacher education on teachers’ experiences, beliefs, and classroom practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 49, 66–77.
Thompson, C. L., & Shrigley, R. (1986). What research says: Revising the science attitude scale. School Science and Mathematics, 86, 331–343.
Thompson, D., & Orion, N. (1999). Changes in perceptions and attitudes of pre-service postgraduate secondary science teachers: A comparative study of programs in Israel, England and Wales. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17, 165–192.
Thomson, R. G., & Thompson, A. G. (1975). Building attitudes toward science for pre-service teachers: An experiment. School Science and Mathematics, 75, 213–216.
Tobin, K., Briscoe, C., & Holman, J. R. (1990). Overcoming constraints to effective elementary science teaching. Science Education, 74, 409–420.
Tobin, K., & LaMaster, S. U. (1995). Relationships between metaphors, beliefs, and actions in the context of science curriculum change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 225–242.
Tosun, T. (2000). The beliefs of preservice elementary teachers toward science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 100, 374–379.
Tsai, C. (2002). Nested epistemologies: Science teachers’ beliefs of teaching, learning, and science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 771–783.
van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 673–695.
Victor, E. (1962). Why are our elementary school teachers reluctant to teach science? Science Education, 46, 185–192.
Wang, H., & Cox-Peterson, A. (2002). A comparison of elementary, secondary and student teachers’ perceptions and practices related to history of science instruction. Science & Education, 11, 69–81.
Wang, H. A., & Marsh, D. D. (2002). Science instruction with a humanistic twist: Teachers’ perception and practice in using the history of science in their classrooms. Science & Education, 11, 169–189.
Washton, N. S. (1961). Improving elementary teachers education in science. Science Education, 45, 33–34.
Weaver, H. M., Hounshell, P. B., & Coble, C. B. (1979). Effects of science methods courses with and without field experiences on attitudes of preservice elementary teachers. Science Education, 63, 655–664.
Welch, W. W., & Walberg, H. J. (1967). An evaluation of summer institute programs for physics teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 105–109.
Windschitl, M. (2000). Pre-service science teachers and the independent inquiry experience (Eric Document Reproduction Service no. ED 441703).
Woolfolk, A., & Hoy, W. (1990). Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 81–91.
Wytias, P. L. (1962). A study of attitudes of 5th grade teachers of Cumberland County New Jersey toward science and their preparation for teaching it in elementary school. Science Education, 46, 151–152.
Yerrick, R., & Hoving, T. (1999). Obstacles confronting technology initiatives as seen through the experience of science teachers: A comparative study of science teachers’ beliefs, planning, and practice. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 291–307.
Yerrick, R., & Hoving, T. (2003). One foot on the dock and one foot on the boat: Differences among preservice science teachers’ interpretations of field-based science methods in culturally diverse contexts. Science Education, 87, 390–418.
Yerrick, R., Parke, H., & Nugent, J. (1997). Struggling to promote deeply rooted change: The “filtering effect” of teachers’ beliefs on understanding transformational views of teaching science. Science Education, 81, 137–159.
Zahur, R., Barton, A. C., & Upadhyay, B. R. (2002). Science education for empowerment and social change: A case study of a teacher educator in urban Pakistan. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 899–917.
Zhang, B., Krajcik, J., Wang, L., Hu, J., Wu, J., Qiang, Y., et al. (2003, April). Opportunities and challenges of China's inquiry-based education reform in middle and high school: Perspectives of science teachers and teacher educators. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association, National Conference, Chicago.
Zint, M. (2002). Comparing three attitude-behavior theories for predicting science teachers’ intentions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 819–844.
Zipf, R., & Harrison, A. (2003, April). The terrarium unit: A challenge to teachers’ concepts of what is science teaching. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago.