Effects of a Long-Term
Participatory Action Research
Project on Science Teachers’
Professional Development

Ingo Eilks; Silvija Markic

doi:10.12973/ejmste/75196

Effects of a Long-Term Participatory Action Research Project on Science Teachers’ Professional Development

Full Text (PDF)

Ingo Eilks ¹ ^* , Silvija Markic ¹

More Detail

¹ University of Bremen, Bremen, GERMANY^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

This paper describes the potential of long-term co-operation between science educators and science teachers concerning the teachers’ continuous professional development, based on Participatory Action Research in science education. The discussion is based on a sixyear case study observing a group of about ten German chemistry teachers by chemistry educators from the university. Substantial changes in teachers’ professional habits and views were found. These findings will be theoretically framed within the Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) debate, a model representing three different modes of action research and the Interconnected Model of Teachers’ Professional Growth (IMTPG). The following discussion will provide an explanation of the changes in the teachers’ professional attitudes and views. This is based on a description of overcoming the participatory approach by addressing essential elements of teacher emancipation. Consequences for classical approaches of in-service teacher training are discussed.

Keywords

Participatory Action Research
PCK
IMTPG-model
teachers’ professional development
participation/emancipation

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2011, Volume 7, Issue 3, 149-160

https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75196

Publication date: 21 Jun 2011

Article Views: 2385

Article Downloads: 1752

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Altrichter, H., & Gstettner, P. (1993). Action Research: A closed chapter in the history of German school science. Educational Action Research, 1, 325-360.
Anderson, R., & Helms, J. V. (2001). The ideal of standards and the reality of schools: Needed Research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 3-16.
Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (1996). Assessing teachers' practical knowledge. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 22, 275-286.
Bencze, L., & Hodson, D. (1999). Changing practice by changing practice: Toward more authentic science and science curriculum development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 521-539.
Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D. C. Berliner, R. C. Caffee (eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology, pp. 709-725. New York, MacMillan.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London, Falmer.
Clarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 947-967.
De Jong, O. (2000). Crossing the borders: chemical education research and teaching practice. University Chemistry Education, 4, 29-32.
De Jong, O. (2007). Trends in western science curricula and science education research: A bird’s eye view. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 6, 15-22.
De Jong, O., Van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2005). Preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of using particle models in teaching chemistry. Journal of Research on Science Teaching, 42, 947-964.
Dickson, G., & Green, K. L. (2001). The external researcher in Participatory Action Research. Educational Action Research, 9, 243-260.
Dresner, M., & Worley, E. (2006). Teacher research experiences, partnerships with scientists, and teacher networks sustaining factors from professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 1-15.
Eilks, I. (2002). Participatory Action Research in chemical education - A research design and experiences with its application. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Science Education, pp. 156-167. Nicosia: Cyprus Ministry of Education and Culture.
Eilks, I. (2003). Co-operative curriculum development in a project of Participatory Action Research within chemical education: Teachers' reflections. Science Education International,14, no. 4, 41-49.
Eilks, I. (2005). Experiences and reflections about teaching atomic structure in a jigsaw classroom in lower secondary school chemistry lessons. Journal of Chemical Education, 82, 313-320.
Eilks, I., et al.. (2005). Chemie interaktiv (Lehrwerksreihe für mittlere Schulformen). Berlin, Cornelsen.
Eilks, I., Möllering, J., & Valanides, N. (2007). Seventh-grade students' understanding of chemical reactions – Reflections from an action research interview study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3, 271-286.
Eilks, I., & Ralle, B. (2002. Participatory Action Research in chemical education. In B. Ralle, I. Eilks (eds.), Research in Chemical Education - What does this mean?, pp. 87-98. Aachen, Shaker.
Eilks, I., & Ralle, B. (2003) Forschungs- und Handlungsperspektiven für die Chemiedidaktik am Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts – Ein Beitrag zur Diskussion über das Selbstverständnis der Chemiedidaktik als wissenschaftliche Disziplin. Chemie konkret, 9, 171-175.
Eilks, I., & Ralle, B. (2006). Towards research-based science teacher education. Aachen, Shaker.
Eilks, I., Ralle, B., Markic, S., Pilot, A., & Valanides, N. (2006). Ways towards research-based science teacher education. In I. Eilks and B. Ralle (eds.), Towards researchbased science teacher education, pp. 179-184. Aachen, Shaker.
Eilks, I., Witteck, T., & Pietzner, V. (2009). A critical discussion of the efficacy of using visual learning aids from the Internet to promote understanding, illustrated with examples explaining the Daniell voltaic cell. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5, 145-152.
Feldman, A. (1996). Enhancing the practice of physics teachers: Mechanisms for the generation and sharing of knowledge and understanding in collaborative action research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 513- 540.
Grundy, S. (1982). Three modes of action research. Curriculum Perspectives, 2, 23-34.
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.
Huberman, M. (1993). Linking the practitioner and researcher communities for school improvement. School Effectiveness and School Improvements, 4, 1-16.
Kemmis, S. (1993). Action research and social movement: A challenge for policy research. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 1(1). http://olam.ed.asu.edu/epaa/v1n1.html
Lewin, K. (1946). Action Research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2, 34-46.
Lederman, N. G., Gess-Newsome, J., & Latz, M. S. (1994). The nature and development of preservice science teachers’ conceptions of subject matter and pedagogy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 129-146.
Magnussen, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, source, and development of pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome and N. G. Lederman (eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge, pp. 95-132. Dordrecht, Kluwer.
Marion, R., Hewson, P. W., Tabachnik, B. R., & Blomker, K. B. (1999). Teaching for conceptual change in elementary and secondary science courses. Science Education, 88, 275-307.
Marks, R., Bertram, S., & Eilks, I. (2008). Learning chemistry and beyond with a lesson plan on “potato crisps”, which follows a socio-critical and problem-oriented approach to Chemistry lessons – A case study. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9, 267-276.
Master, J. (1995). The history of action research. In I. Hughes (ed.), Action research electronic reader. Sydney: The University of Sydney. www.docstoc.com/docs/ 2187576/THE-HISTORY-OF-ACTIONRESEARCH.
Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1. www.qualitativeresearch.net/fqs. .
McIntyre, D. (2005). Bridging the gap between research and practice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35, 357-382.
Moser, H. (1975). Aktionsforschung als kritische Theorie der Sozialwissenschaften. München, Kösel.
Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 317-328.
Noffke, S. (1994). Action Research: towards the next generation. Educational Action Research, 2, 9-21.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Changing up a massy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307-322.
Parke, H. M., & Coble, C. R. (1997). Teachers designing curriculum as professional development: A model for transformational science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 773-790.
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29, 4-15.
Ralle, B., & Eilks, I. (2002). Research in chemical education - What does this mean? Aachen, Shaker.
Ralle, B., & Eilks, I. (2004). Quality in practice-oriented research in science education. Aachen, Shaker.
Riquarts, K., & Hansen, K. H. (1998). Collaboration among teachers, researchers and in-service trainers to develop an integrated science curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30, 661 - 676.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
Smith, D. C., & Neale, D. C. (1989). The construction of subject matter knowledge in primary science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5, 1-20.
Staub, F. C., West, L., & Bickel, D.D. (2003). What is Content-Focused Coaching? In L. West, F. C. Staub (eds.), Content-Focused Coaching. Transforming mathematics lessons, pp. 1-17. Portsmouth, Heinemann.
Thompson, C. L., & Zeuli, J. S. (1999). The frame and the tapestry: Standards-based reform and professional development. In L. Darling-Hammond, G. Sykes (eds.), Teaching as the learning profession. Handbook of policy and practice, pp. 341-375. San Fransisco, Jossey-Bass.
Tobin, K. G., & Dawson, G. (1992). Constraints to curriculum reform: Teachers and the myths of schooling. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 40, 81-92.
Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for science teaching. In D. Gable (ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, pp. 45-93. New York, Macmillan.
Van Driel, J. H. (2002). The role of teacher knowledge in the context of reform in chemical education. In B. Ralle, I. Eilks (eds.), Research in chemical education - What does this mean?, pp. 75-86. Aachen, Shaker.
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.
Whyte, W. F., Greenwood, D. J., & Lazes, P. (1989). Participatory Action Research. The American Behavioral Scientist, 32, 513-551.
Wilson, S., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. In A. Iran-Nejad, P. D. Pearson (eds.), Review of Research in Education 24, pp. 173-209. Washington, AERA.

How to cite this article

APA

Eilks, I., & Markic, S. (2011). Effects of a Long-Term Participatory Action Research Project on Science Teachers’ Professional Development. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 7(3), 149-160. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75196

Vancouver

Eilks I, Markic S. Effects of a Long-Term Participatory Action Research Project on Science Teachers’ Professional Development. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2011;7(3):149-60. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75196

AMA

Eilks I, Markic S. Effects of a Long-Term Participatory Action Research Project on Science Teachers’ Professional Development. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2011;7(3), 149-160. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75196

Chicago

Eilks, Ingo, and Silvija Markic. "Effects of a Long-Term Participatory Action Research Project on Science Teachers’ Professional Development". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2011 7 no. 3 (2011): 149-160. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75196

Harvard

Eilks, I., and Markic, S. (2011). Effects of a Long-Term Participatory Action Research Project on Science Teachers’ Professional Development. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 7(3), pp. 149-160. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75196

MLA

Eilks, Ingo et al. "Effects of a Long-Term Participatory Action Research Project on Science Teachers’ Professional Development". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 7, no. 3, 2011, pp. 149-160. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75196