Teaching Beliefs and Practices A Survey of High School Chemistry Teachers Huann Shyang Lin and Frances Lawrenz Department of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455 What teaching strategies do they use? and I n the early SO'S, the move toward science educational reform intensified through a series of national initiatives: W h a t assessment techniques do they use? National Assessment of Educational Progress ( I ) , National In addition, ANOVA (i.e., Analysis ofvariance, a statistiCommission on Excellence in Education (21, Project Syncal technique to check the difference between groups. By thesis (3), and Project 2061 (4). These initiatives claimed using ANOVA, we can ask whether three, four, or K group that for the purpose of enhancing students' scientific litermeans differ) and post hoc comparisons were used to exacy and positive attitude toward science, science teaching should stress a student-centered, process-based approach Table 1. Number of Respondents by Age and Average rather than rote-memorization of science facts. Under the Years of Experience Teaching impetus of these initiatives, numerous research studies have been published (51, many chemistry teachers have atGroup Age Range Average years Number of tended in-service trainings (61, preservice teacher-training of Experience Teachers programs have been modified (71,many curriculum mate1 below 30 3.8 25 rials have been produced (81, and effective teaching strategies have been investigated (9).What has been the impact 2 30-39 10.9 47 of these mechanisms on what goes on in chemistry class3 40-49 20.6 88 rooms? This study was designed to determine what goes on 4 50 and above 27.7 51 in chemistry classrooms by describing the current status of chemistrv teachers' ~erceutionsand their teaching and classroom assessment patterns in Table 2. Means and Standard Deviatlons (SD's) of Opinions about Teachinga Minnesota. In addition, to examine better the effect of preservice and inservice changes in teacher Statement Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Overall education, this study examined Science is a difficultsubject forchildren 3.4 perceptions and teaching practices to learn (1.1) among teachers with different levHands-on science experiences aren't 4.6 els of experience. worth the time and expense (0.7) This study asked Minnesota I enjoy teaching science 1.6 chemistry teachers to provide the (1.O) following information: (1)backMy school adm nfstratorbelieves sc ence 3.7 ground information, age, gender, is less important than other SJbleCts (1.1) and teaching experience; and (2) I have enough time to plan my classes 3.6 perceptions and teaching practices, i.e., factors influencing sci(1.3) My classes have too many students 2.5 ence instruction, objectives for sci(1.3) ence instruction, and time spent Laboratory-based science classes are 2.1 on various teaching activities and more effective than non-laboratory (1.4) assessment methods. classes Arepresentative random sample I consider myself a "master"science 2.8 of Minnesota schools was selected teacher (1.1) by dividing the state's school disOnly the more able students can 4.1 tricts into six population strata participate in problem solving activities (0.7) based on total student population. Most for - - science - - ~ - - instruction - -- . semndarv .... 4.0 Schools were selected randomly schoo StLdents snould foes on the' (1.O) within strata and teachers were nnowledge, recall, ana comprehens on selected randomly from the school, leve s as opposed lo the appllcar~on. a total of 211 chemistry teachers analysis, synthesis, and evaluation levels participated i n this study. The Secondary school students should keep 2.4 data are presented as frequency science laboratory notebooks (1.O) counts and percentages to answer the following questions. Secondary school students should 2.4 design and conduct their own (0.9) exDerimentS What are the characteristics of ,~ chemistry teachers? 1' =strongly agree,2 =agree.3 =no opinion, 4 =disagree,5 = stmngiy disagree 'What are their opinions about b~~~~~ is significant at p = 0.05 teaching? 'ANOVA is significant at p = 0.01 What objectives do they emphad~~~~~ is significant at p = 0.001 size? ( )So's are in parentheses ~
904
Journal of Chemical Education
~
~~
amine differences in teachers' perceptions and teaching practices related to level of experience. What Are the Characteristics of Chemistry Teachers? Among the 211 chemistry teachers surveyed, 27 were female (12.8%). and 184 were male (87.2%). The teachers ranged in agi from 25 to 61 years old with an average age of 43. They reported having 1 to 37 years of experience teaching with an average of 18.2 years. They also reported having participated in a variety of training experiences, either credit courses or noncredit workshops. The characteristics of the Minnesota chemistry teachers in this study are quite similar to characteristics of science teachers naThe Minnesota teachers did, however, report tionally (10). having engaged in more in-service training than teachers nationally I 100%versus 7391. The teachers in this study were cateeorized into four monps to allow the aeefexperience com&isons. The dist>bu&m of teachers b; age and vears of experience is shown in Table 1. The most popuiated groupis group 3, aged from 40 to 49. What Are Chemistry Teachers' Opinions about Teaching? Each respondent was asked to indicate the extent to which helshe agreed to the statements in Table 2 about science teaching on a 1to 5 scale with 1=strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = no opinion, 4 = disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree. The overall and each group's means and standard deviations are presented in Table 2. As can be seen from Table 2, the most strongly held beliefs of the chemistry teachers were:
hands-on or laboratory-based science are effective most of students can participate in problem-solving activities science teaching should not just focus on the knowledge and recall levels These were couoled with the fmdine that they enioved teaching chemist6 and that they felt their adm&s&&or believed chemistrv was important. These beliefs were analyzed to determine if any differences existed among the teachers from the four agelexperience groups. Only four of the 12 questions showed statistically significant differences. I t appears that the more experienced teachers (i.e., group 3 or 4) have more confidence especially in planning and with numbers of students. I t also appears that the younger teachers (i.e., group 1 or 2) agree more than the older teachers (i.e., group 3 or 4) that students should design and conduct their own experiments. What Emphasis Do Chemistry Teachers Give to Teaching - Obiectives? . The teachers also were asked to rate their devee of emphasis fur each of the objectives listed in Table 3 on a I to 5 smie with I =no emphasis and 5 = very much emphasis. The top five most emphasized Leaching objectives were to:
learn basic science concepts develop a systematic approach to solving problems develop inquiry skills develop sldlls in lab techniques prepare for further study in science These oerceptions were analyzed to determine if there were an &&-for age/experience. The four agelexperience groups of teachers have similar views of teaching objectives except that the most experienced teachers be., group 4) were more likely to emphasize history of science and the acouisition of lab techniaues than the less exoerienced teachers (i.e., group 2 or 3).
Table 3. Means and SD's of Emphasis Given to Teaching Objectives
Teaching objective Become motivated to study science Learn basic science wncepts Prepare for further study in science Develop inquiring skills
Group Grwp Grwp Group OJera 1 2 3 4 1 1 3.6 3.7 3.7 4.0 3.7 (0.8) (0.8) (1.0) (0.9) (0.9)
Develop a systematic approach to solving problems Learn to effectiiely communicate ideas in science Become aware of the importance of science in daily life Learn about the applitiirs Learn what evidence is necessary to constitute scientific proof Learn how scientific explanations have changed throughout history Learn how to design and carry out experiments Learn how to formulate hypotheses Deve op c~riosityawJt natJra phenomena Learn about the career relevance of science Develop awareness of safety issues in lab Develop skill in lab techniques . . . 1' = no emphasis. 2 = iidle emphasis, 3 = moderate emphasis, 4 = much emphasis, 5 =very much emphasis b~~~~~ is significant at p=.05 ( ) SD's are in parentheses What Teaching Strategies Do Chemistry Teachers Use in Their Classrooms? Each respondent was asked to indicate how often hefshe used various teaching strategies with the ratings 1 = never, 2 = less than once a month, 3 = a t least once a month, 4 = at least once a week, and 5 = daily. The results are presented in Table 4. The teaching strategies used most often by these teachers were:
lecture/ demonstrations students answering questiondproblems from text students using hands-on, manipulative, or laboratory materials students working in paired laboratory gmups 'teacher demonstrations The agelexperience wmparisons revealed that younger teachers (i.e., group 1or 2) are likely to use lecture, demonstrations, and quizzes more often than do experienced Volume 69 Number 11 November 1992
905
Table 4. Means and SD's for Frequency of Use of Teaching Strategiesa
Lecture1 demonstration
Method of Assessment
Group Group Group Groupoverall
Teaching strategy A '.
Table 5. Means and SD's for Degree of Emphasis on Assessment Techniquesa
1 2 4.7 (0.4)
3
4
A.
6.
Student reports of projects
2.4 (0.9)
%.
C.
Library work
C.
D.
Students work at chalkboard
1.8 (0.6) 2.2 (1.O)
E.
Students read from text
3.4 (1.4)
E.
%
Students answer questions from textbook
4.4 (0.5)
F.
G.
Students use hands-on, manipulative, or lab materials
3.8 (0.5)
Students work in paired laboratory groups
3.7 (0.8)
9.
Films, videotapes, or filmstrips
2.6 (0.8)
J.
Computer-assisted 1.8 instructions (0.8) Tests or quizzes 3.4
H.
%. L.
Field trips, excursions
W. Teacher
demonstrations
N.
Cooperative WOUDS
(0.5) 1.5 (0.5) 3.9 (0.9) 2.3 11.01
$1 =never, 2= less than once a month, 3 =at least once a month, 4 = at least once a week, 5= daily b~~~~~ is significant at p = 0.05 'ANOVAis significant at p = 0.01 'ANOVA is significant at p = 0.001 ( ) SD's are in parentheses
teachers (i.e., group 3 or 4). The use of fdms/videos was lower for the most experienced teachers (i.e., group 4) and higher for teachers with a mid range of experience (i.e., group 3). This pattern was reversed for the use of answering questions from the textbook with the younger teachers (i.e., group 1)using it the most and the mid-range teachers using it less (i.e., group 2 or 3). What Assessment Techniques Do Chemistry Teachers Use? The teachers were asked to rate the degree of emphasis they placed on various assessment techniques on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 =no emphasis to 5 =very much emphasis. The data for the teachers in each of the four agelexperience groups are presented in Table 5. The five assessment techniques emphasized the most by the chemistry teachers are dassmom testa homework
laboratory notebooks laboratory tests class discussion
906
Journal of Chemical Education
Group Group Group Group Overall 1
2
3
4
Classrmm tests Laboratory tests
4.3 (0.8)
4.2 (0.8)
4.4 (0.7)
4.3 (0.8)
4.3 (0.8)
2.4 (1.1)
3.2 (1.1)
3.0 (1.1)
3.4 (1.1)
3.0 (1.1)
Designing experiments Laboratory notebooks Homework
2.0 (0.7)
2.2 (1.0)
1.9 (0.8)
1.9 (0.9)
2.0 (0.9)
4.0 (1.0)
3.1 (1.0
3.2 (1.2)
3.3 (1.2)
3.3 (1.1)
3.6 (1.0) 2.3 (1.0)
3.4 (1.1) 2.6 (1.0)
3.2 (0.8) 2.6 (1.1)
3.3 (1.0) 2.6 (1.0)
3.3 (1.O) 2.6 (1.0)
2.0 (1.3) 1.8 (1.0) 2.1 (1.0)
2.2 (1.3) 2.2 (1.3) 2.4 (1.3)
2.4 (1.3) 2.1 (1.2) 2.1 (1.1)
2.4 (1.3) 2.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.1)
2.3 (1.3) 2.1 (1.2) 2.1 (1.1)
G.
Class discussion Attendance
H.
Behavior
I.
Science projects
1 ' = no emphasis, 2 = linle emphasis, 3 = moderate emphasis, 4 emDhasis.5 = Vew much emhasis 'ANOVA is signkcant at p=.05 %NOVA is significant at p = 0.01 ( ) SD's are in parentheses
=
much
The agelexperience comparisions showed differences in the preference of using laboratory tests and laboratory notebooks between younger teachers and more experienced teachers. Experienced teachers (i.e., group 2 or 3 or 4) stress laboratory tests more than do younger teachers (i.e., group 1). On the other hand, younger teachers prefer to use laboratory notebooks more than do experienced teachers. Discussion The data in this survey reveal an optimistic future for chemical education in Minnesota. The chemistry teachers seem to be aware of a n d a r e implementing the recommended types of science teaching such as hands-on and orocess-based inauirv " teachine. However., thev " still feel the responsibility to teach more basic science concepts in order to oreoare students for further chemistrv studv. This is exemplified by their ranking "learning basic science conceots" as the first ~rioritvin teachina obiectives. This findinfg isconsistent ;ith ~ i ; c h e l l ( land l ~ Yager(12). Mitchell found that 799 high school chernistrv tearhers felt content knowledge was essential for students, while only 2% of college chemistry instructors felt such knowledge was essential for success in college chemistry. Yager also states that each teacher feels that it is hisher responsibility to prepare students for the next higher level in instruction. Although learning basic concepts is important for future study, recent work in science education recommends that teachers should have a more holistic view of science teaching. Future efforts in chemical education should try to reinforce this view. Another finding of this study is the differences for agelexperience. Usually the differences were directly related to agelexperience trends, but interestingly many times first and last groups were closer to each other than to the middle groups. Future studies may want to investigate possible reasons for these groupings. The more expe-
.
..
-
rienced teachers appear to be more contident about their teaching than their younger counterparts. This confidence may be the effect of in-service training. Since these teachers have been updated on science and science teaching in addition to their experiences, it is no wonder that they are it appears that the experienced teachers would emphasize laboratory techniques (as found in Table 3), and laboratory assessment (as found in Table 5) more than younger teachers. This may indicate a p s i tive effect for experience and the concomitant training as documented in other research on teachers (13). Literature Cited 1. Natl.Asseas Educ. R o g . 1981,14(1),7. 2. National Commiaaion on Excellence ?n Edueati0n.A Notion at Risk: The Impmtiue forEduclionolRPfff: NCEE: Washington. DC.1983.
3. liarma, N. c.:yageq R. E w h o t ~ sey8tothe ~ ~ ~ &ienep h nchher; NSTA: wash. ingtan, DC,1983;Vol. 3. 4, hoeiation for the ~ d ~ omienee. ~ ~ - sebncefor ~ ~ At I I A ~ AAAS: washinson DC, 1989. 5. ~ r a t t G , .J. them E ~ Z C1988, 65110).896897; vermgopdan, M. J c h p m E&C. lSSO,6712), 101-102; LyUleott, J. J Chem. Educ l m , 67131,248-252. & Smith,C.H. J Chem.Educ. 19ffl,61111I,lOW;Mellon,E. K J. Chrm. Edue l w , 65191, 786787. 7. A N a t i m ~ * o ~ ~ d : ~ ~ h e c~ ~~f ~~ t h~ o z~ ~ ~ t . c1986. ~ 8. mnc WOS~Z:Anoe;ningsimuiofion.~ddis~~-WWWI~Y: N W Y O ~1991. ~. 9. Novak, J. D.;Gorin, D.B. ~ e o m i w~ o uto, &om. cambridge:~ e YO* w 1986; h d , J.R.J. Camp. M o t h S d . 'k& 1989,9(1), 9&105. 10. Weiss, I. &port oftho 1985.19B6NofiomI Sirmy ofSebmcmdMnthomoluaEd. ~ ~ t ihsesrch o ~ ; %iangle: NC, 1987. 11. Mikhell. T. J.J. C h . Edue 1989.6617), 5 S M . 12. y a g e r , ~ .E . s ~ noch. . 1980,53(1), 145. 13. Barlm, H: Iivingston,C . A m Edue. Re.J. 1989,2614),473-496; Johnson. S. D.J. Ind. Tooeh.Edue. l989,2613I,1%37;Swanwn,H.L A m E d u e . Res. J . 1890,2713), 533-556.
Volume 69 Number 11 November 1992
907
~ ,
~
~
~
