Middle School Science Teachers' Perception on Science Inquiry Teaching Efficacy

중학교 과학 교사들의 과학 탐구 교수 효능감에 대한 인식

  • Received : 2018.05.07
  • Accepted : 2018.06.19
  • Published : 2018.06.30


This study aims to explore science inquiry teaching efficacy that middle school science teachers implementing science practice-based teaching for one year recognized as necessary for teaching science through science practice. Examining interview data in this study, science inquiry teaching efficacy was identified in both planning and implementing in the areas of managing efficacy, instructional strategy efficacy, and content knowledge efficacy. In planning science inquiry instruction, there is science curriculum management efficacy under managing efficacy. There are the efficacy of outlining science inquiry lesson, efficacy of organizing science practice, efficacy of questioning for science practice, and efficacy of understanding student science practice under instructional strategy efficacy. Under the content knowledge efficacy are contents and science practice understanding efficacy and core ideas efficacy. In implementing science inquiry instruction, managing efficacy includes science practice time management efficacy and science practice classroom culture efficacy. Instructional strategy efficacy includes efficacy of motivating student science practice, efficacy of responding to student science practice, efficacy of stimulating student active thinking, efficacy of student active engagement in argumentation, efficacy of evaluating student participation. No content knowledge efficacy have been identified in implementing science inquiry instruction.

본 연구에서는 과학 탐구 수업을 1년간 수행한 중학교 과학 교사들이 과학 탐구 수업을 하기 위해 필요하다고 하는 효능감이 무엇인지 개별 면담 자료 분석을 통해 밝히고자 한다. 본 연구 참여 교사들이 과학 탐구 수업을 하기 위해서 필요하다고 하는 과학 탐구 교수 효능감은 과학 탐구 수업 계획 단계와 수행 단계에서 다르게 나타났고, 각 단계에서의 효능감은 수업 관리 효능감, 교수 전략 효능감, 교과지식 효능감으로 분류할 수 있었다. 과학 탐구 수업 계획 단계에서의 수업 관리 효능감에는 '과학 탐구 수업을 위한 교육 과정 운영 효능감'이 포함되었고, 교수 전략 효능감에는 '과학 탐구 수업 개요 설정 효능감', '과학 실천 간 논리적 조직 효능감', '과학 실천 별 적절한 발문 계획 효능감', '과학 실천을 하는 학생에 대한 이해 효능감'이 포함되었으며, 교과 지식 효능감에는 '교과 지식 및 과학 실천 이해 효능감', '핵심 개념 설정 효능감'이 포함되었다. 과학 탐구 수업 수행단계에서의 수업 관리 효능감에는 '과학 실천 별 시간 배분 효능감', '과학 실천 교실 문화 정착 효능감'이 포함되었고, 교수 전략 효능감에는 '과학 실천 동기 부여 효능감', '과학 실천 적응적 교수 효능감', '능동적 사고 기회 제공 효능감', '과학 실천 별 논의 참여 독려 효능감', '과학 실천 별 참여도 평가 효능감'이 포함되었다. 본 연구의 참여 교사들은 과학 탐구 수업 수행을 위하여 필요한 효능감으로 교과 지식 효능감은 언급하지 않았다.



  1. Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok‐ Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D. & Tuan, H. L. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397-419.
  2. An, Y., & Lim, H. (2010). The relationships among science teaching efficacy, view of learning, and psychological environment for science learning of elementary teachers. Studies on Constitutional Cases, 23, 103-113.
  3. Anderson, R. D. (1996). Study of curriculum reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  4. Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12.
  5. Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents, 5, 307-337.
  6. Bang, A., & Choi, A. (2016). Pre-service chemistry teachers’ designing and implementing inquiry-Based science instruction that emphasizes argumentation and writing: Focus on ways to overcome difficulties. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 60(5), 342-352.
  7. Cho, H., Han, I., Kim, H., & Yang, I. (2008). Analysis of elementary teachers’ views on barriers in implementing inquiry-based instructions. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(8), 901-921.
  8. Cho, S., & Baek, J. (2015). A case study on the inquiry guidance experiences of pre-service science teachers: Resolving the dilemmas between cognition and practice of inquiry. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(4), 573-584.
  9. Choi, S., & Kim, S. (2010). An exploration of the influencing factors and development of effective models of science teacher efficiency. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 30(6), 693-718.
  10. Chung, K., & Hur, M. (1993). Inquiry learning in the high school biology: Status survey and problem analysis. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 13(2), 146-151.
  11. Denzin, N. K. (1970). Sociological Methods: A Sourcebook. London: Butterworths.
  12. Dira-Smolleck, L. (2004). The development and validation of an instrument to measure preservice teachers'self-efficacy in regard to the teaching of science as inquiry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University.
  13. Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569-582.
  14. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory Strategies for Qualitative Research. Piscataway, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
  15. Han, Y., Jeun, E., & Paik, S. (2014). Analysis of scientific inquiry elements in middle school science textbooks, teachers’ cognition, and an experiment case. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(4), 349-357.
  16. Hong, J., & Kim, J. (2003). The effects of concept maps construction processes on preservice Elementary Teachers’ Self-efficacy for Science Teaching and Views on Science Learning. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 22(3), 297-303.
  17. In, S., Kim, Y., & Choi, A. (2018). Literature review on research studies of science teaching efficacy. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(8), 645-661.
  18. Jang, S. (2006). Prospective elementary school teachers’ perceptions of inquiry-oriented teaching practice, with an emphasis on students’ scientific explanation. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 25(1), 96-108.
  19. Ju, D. (2009). Review of researches in concept, measurement, effect, and influence factor of teacher efficacy. The Journal of Fisheries and Marine Science Education, 21(4), 489-498.
  20. Kang, N., & Lee, E. (2013). An analysis of inquiry activities in high school physics textbooks for the 2009 revised science curriculum. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(1), 132-143.
  21. Kim, H. (2010). An analysis of elementary science teaching efficacy. Journal of educational studies, 41(1), 91-118.
  22. Kim, S., & Lee, J. (2015). Comparison of preservice teachers’ pedagogical knowledge for science teaching and science teaching efficacy before and after field experiences. Korean Journal of Teacher Education, 31(2), 133-155.
  23. Kim, Y. (2005). A review on the research trend and the related variables of "Teacher Efficacy". Journal of Humanities and Social Science Education, 8, 1-17.
  24. Kim, Y. (2013). Qualitative research. Paju: Academypress.
  25. Klassen, R. M., Tze, V. M., Betts, S. M., & Gordon, K. A. (2011). Teacher efficacy research 1998-2009: Signs of progress or unfulfilled promise?. Educational Psychology Review, 23(1), 21-43.
  26. Koh, H., Choi, M., & Kang, S. (2007). Research articles: A study on some background variables related to the science teaching efficacy beliefs of pre-service and in-service elementary school teachers. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 26(2), 192-200.
  27. Kuhn, D. (2007). Reasoning about multiple variables: Control of variables is not the only challenge. Science Education, 91(5), 710-726.
  28. Lee, B. (2013). Pre-service science teachers' difficulties in the "inquiry mentoring" program. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(7), 1300-1311.
  29. Lee, H., Cho, H., & Sohn, J. (2009). The teachers’ view on using argumentation in school science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 29(6), 666-679.
  30. Lee, H., Yoon, H., Lee, K., & Cho, H. (2010). Secondary Science Teachers’ Perception of ‘Free inquiry’ of the 2007 Revised Science Curriculum. Secondary Education Research, 58(3), 213-235.
  31. Lee, S., & Lee, B. (2018). Analysis of Middle School Science Teachers’ Difficulties in Teaching Physics Inquiry in Textbooks. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 68(4), 411-421.
  32. Lee, S., & Lim, C. (2011). Effect of the teachers’ science teaching efficacy on the science process skills and scientific attitudes of elementary school students. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 30(4), 459-467.
  33. Lee, Y., Yeo, S., & Lim, H. (2008). The effect of professional development of elementary science experiment on science teaching efficacy and teacher’s attitude towards science teaching. Studies on Constitutional Cases, 21(1), 91-99.
  34. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). The "what" of the study: Building the conceptual framework. Designing Qualitative Research, 3, 21-54.
  35. Ministry of Education. (2015). 2015 revised curriculum-Science. Seoul: Ministry of Education.
  36. Narayan, R., & Lamp, D. (2010). "Me? Teach science?"Exploring EC-4 pre-service teachers’ self efficacy in an inquiry-based constructivist physics classroom. Educational Research and Reviews, 5(12), 748.
  37. National Research council [NRC] (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  38. National Research Council [NRC] (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  39. National Research Council [NRC] (2013). The Next Generation Science Standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  40. Noh, T., Kim, Y., Yang, C., & Kang, H. (2011). A case study on beginning teachers’ teaching professionalism based on pedagogical content knowledge in science-gifted education. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(8), 1214-1228.
  41. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.
  42. Park, G., & Kim, Y. (2007). Analysis of difference between preferences and practice about science teachers’ inquiry based instruction. Journal of Science Education, 31, 1-10.
  43. Park, Y. (2006). Theoretical study on the opportunity of scientific argumentation for implementing authentic scientific inquiry. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 27(4), 401-415.
  44. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. SAGE Publications, inc.
  45. Peters-Burton, E. E., Merz, S. A., Ramirez, E. M., & Saroughi, M. (2015). The effect of cognitive apprenticeship-based professional development on teacher self-efficacy of science teaching, motivation, knowledge calibration, and perceptions of inquiry-based teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(6), 525-548.
  46. Riggs, I. M., & Enochs, L. G. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74(6), 625-637.
  47. Ryu, K., Jung, J., Kim, Y., & Kim, H. (2012). Understanding qualitative research methods. Seoul: Pakyoungsa.
  48. Smolleck, L. A., & Yoder, E. P. (2008). Further development and validation of the teaching science as inquiry (TSI) instrument. School Science and Mathematics, 108(7), 291-297.
  49. Smolleck, L. A., & Mongan, A. M. (2011). Changes in preservice teachers’ self-efficacy: From science methods to student teaching. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 1(1), 133.
  50. Soprano, K., & Yang, L. L. (2013). Inquiring into my science teaching through action research : A case study on one pre-service teacher's inquiry-based science teaching and self-efficacy. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 11(6). 1351-1368.
  51. Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge University Press.
  52. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
  53. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805.
  54. Varma, T., Volkmann, M., & Hanuscin, D. (2009). Preservice elementary teachers’perceptions of their understanding of inquiry and inquiry-based science pedagogy: Influence of an elementary science education methods course and a science field experience. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(4), 1-22.
  55. Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131-175.
  56. Yang, I., Cho, H., & Han, I. (2006). The teachers and students' perceptions about the purpose of laboratory activities in elementary school science education, Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum an Instruction, 6(1), 235-252.
  57. Yang, M., Min, B., Son, Y., & Kim, D. (2012). Analyzing the difficulty that pre-service science teacher experiences in the middle school science class: Centered on the application of science class models and inquiry process elements. Korean Journal of Teacher Education, 28(2), 143-164.
  58. Yoon, H., Kim, H., Lee, K., & Cho, H. (2012). The effect of free inquiry teacher training program on the secondary science teachers’ perception and teaching efficacy. Korean Journal of Teacher Education, 28(3), 343-363.

Cited by

  1. 중학교 과학 교사의 과학 탐구 교수 지향 vol.64, pp.4, 2018,
  2. 과학 탐구 수업에서 초등학생들이 바라는 과학 교사의 모습에 대한 요인 분석 vol.40, pp.3, 2018,