Experienced teachers' knowledge of teaching and learning of models and modelling in science education

This article reports a study of the knowledge of experienced science teachers in the context of a reform in science education in The Netherlands. The study focused on a major goal of the reform, that is, improving students' knowledge and abilities in the field of models and modelling in science. First, seven teachers of biology and chemistry were interviewed about the teaching and learning of models and modelling in science. Next, a questionnaire was designed consisting of 30 items on a Likert-type scale. This questionnaire was completed by a group ( n = 74) of teachers of biology, chemistry and physics. Results indicated that the teachers could be grouped in two subgroups, who differed in terms of their self-reported use of teaching activities focusing on models: one sub-group applied such activities substantially more often than the other sub-group. This distinction appeared not to be related to the teachers' subject, or teaching experience. Moreover, the use of teaching activities seemed only loosely related to the teachers' knowledge of their students, particularly, students' views of models and modelling abilities. Implications for the design of teacher education are discussed.

[1]  David F. Treagust,et al.  Secondary students' mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry , 1996 .

[2]  G. Aikenhead,et al.  Curriculum change, student evaluation, and teacher practical knowledge , 1992 .

[3]  Jan H. van Driel,et al.  Teachers' Knowledge of Models and Modelling in Science. , 1999 .

[4]  Carolyn J. Boulter.  Language, Models and Modelling in the Primary Science Classroom , 2000 .

[5]  S. Gilbert.  Model building and a definition of science , 1991 .

[6]  Identifiers Australia,et al.  Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching , 1999 .

[7]  Wobbe de Vos,et al.  Public Understanding of Science as a Separate Subject in Secondary Schools in The Netherlands. , 1999 .

[8]  M. Black.  Models and metaphors : studies in language and philosophy , 1962 .

[9]  Derek Hodson,et al.  Re-thinking Old Ways: Towards A More Critical Approach To Practical Work In School Science , 1993 .

[10]  Arthur N. Geddis.  Transforming subject‐matter knowledge: the role of pedagogical content knowledge in learning to reflect on teaching , 1993 .

[11]  Thomas J. Shuell,et al.  Teaching and learning in a classroom context. , 1996 .

[12]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Verbal reports as data. , 1980 .

[13]  Nitza Barnea.  Teaching and Learning about Chemistry and Modelling with a Computer managed Modelling System , 2000 .

[14]  Barbara C. Buckley,et al.  Constructing a Typology of Models for Science Education , 2000 .

[15]  K. Trigwell,et al.  Qualitative differences in approaches to teaching first year university science , 1994 .

[16]  Adri H. Verdonk,et al.  A New Road to Reactions Part 4. The Substance and Its Molecules. , 1987 .

[17]  J. Gilbert,et al.  Developing Models in Science Education , 2000 .

[18]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Positioning Models in Science Education and in Design and Technology Education , 2000 .

[19]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Models in explanations, Part 1 : Horses for courses? , 1998 .

[20]  J. L. Smith,et al.  Semi-Structured Interviewing and Qualitative Analysis , 1995 .

[21]  S. Noffke,et al.  Professional, Personal, and Political Dimensions of Action Research , 1997 .

[22]  Carol L. Smith,et al.  Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts , 1991 .

[23]  Elazar J. Pedhazur,et al.  Measurement, Design, and Analysis: An Integrated Approach , 1994 .