Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Articulating Science Teachers' Values and Convictions for Teaching Socioscientific Issues: Based on Essentialist Methodology

  • Published : 2008.05.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper has two major purposes. One is to introduce the essentialist methodology as a way to articulate subjective aspects of human beings (e.g. teachers' personal values and concerns, philosophies, subjective experiences, etc.) at a deeper level. And the other is to present two portraits, as examples, of science teachers who actively address socioscientiifc issues (SSI) out of their own motivations. The primary data source was consecutive in-depth interviews with two science teachers, Jenna and Thomas, and the interviews were conducted on the basis of the principle of the "participant as ally" (Witz, 2006). The articulation based on the essentialist methodology shows that teachers' deep-rooted values and convictions often play a significant role as a personal social capital enough to expand their teaching practice (i.e. teaching SSI). Namely, this study confirms that teachers who are motivated out of their own convictions are likely to actively develop their own personal practical knowledge, and to implement particular topics or teaching strategies.

Keywords

References

  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: Author
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press: Author
  3. Brickhouse, N.W. (1990). Teachers' beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 53-62 https://doi.org/10.1177/002248719004100307
  4. Cho, H. and Choi, K. (1998). The necessities and current states of science education dealing with socioscientific characteristics of science. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 18(4), 559-570
  5. Clandinin, D.J. and Connelly, F.M. (1994). Personal experience methods. In N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of qualitative research, pp. 413-427. London:Sage
  6. Clandinin, D.J. and Connelly, F.M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers
  7. Connelly, F.M., and Clandinin, D.J (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19(5), 2-14
  8. Cooley, C.H. (1956). The two major works of C. H. Cooley: Social organization and human nature and the social order. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. (Original work published 1909)
  9. Davis, K.S. (2003). "Change is hard": What science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning of innovative practices. Science Education, 87(1), 3-30 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10037
  10. Friedrichsen, P.M., and Dana, T.M. (2005). Substantive-level theory of highly regarded secondary biology teachers' science teaching orientations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 218-44 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20046
  11. Goodson, I. (1991). Biography, identity, and schooling : Episodes in educational research. London; New York: Falmer Press
  12. Haney, J. and McArthur, J. (2002). Four case studies of prospective science teachers' beliefs concerning constructivist teaching practices. Science Education, 86(6), 783-802 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10038
  13. Hansen, K.H. and Olson, J. (1996). How teachers construe curriculum integration: The Science, Technology, Society (STS) movement as Bildung. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28(6), 669-82 https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027980280603
  14. Jenkins, E.W. (1992). School science education: Toward a reconstruction. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24(3), 229-46 https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027920240302
  15. Jenkins, E.W. (2002). Linking school science education with action. In W.M. Roth and J. Desautels (eds), Science education as/for sociopolitical action, pp.17-34. New York: Peter Lang
  16. Lawrence-Lightfoot, S. (1997). A view of the whole. In S. Lawrence-Lightfoot and H. J. Davis (Eds.), The art and science of portraiture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
  17. Lee, H. (2006). Science teachers teaching socioscientific issues (SSI): Four case studies. Unpublished dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  18. Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  19. Marble, S. (1997). Narrative visions of schooling. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 55-64 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(96)00043-1
  20. Ministry of Education. (1992). The 6th Korea National Curriculum Standard. Seoul:Daehan Printing and Publishing Co.
  21. Ministry of Education. (1998). The 7th Korea National Curriculum Standard. Seoul:Daehan Printing and Publishing Co.
  22. National Research Council. (NRC, 1996). National science education standards. Washington, D.C.; National Academic Press
  23. Witz, K.G. (2006). The participant as ally and essentialist portraiture. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 246-68 https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284365
  24. Witz, K.G. (2007). "Awakening to" an aspect in the other: On developing insights and concepts in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(2), 235-58 https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406295634
  25. Witz, K.G. and Lee, H. (in press). Science as an ideal. Journal of Curriculum Studies
  26. Witz, K.G., Goodwin, D.R., Hart, R.S. and Thomas, H.S. (2001). An essentialist methodology in education-related research using in-depth interviews. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(2), 195-227 https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270119026