Content uploaded by Kelly Riedinger
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kelly Riedinger on May 08, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
This article was downloaded by:
[University of Maryland College Park]
On:
13 September 2010
Access details:
Access Details: [subscription number 915429136]
Publisher
Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-
41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Science Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713737283
Professional Identity Development of Teacher Candidates Participating in
an Informal Science Education Internship: A focus on drawings as
evidence
Phyllis Katza; J. Randy McGinnisa; Emily Hestnessa; Kelly Riedingera; Gili Marbach-Adb; Amy Daia;
Rebecca Peasea
a Department of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Maryland, Maryland, USA b College of
Chemical and Life Sciences, University of Maryland, Maryland, USA
First published on: 26 August 2010
To cite this Article Katz, Phyllis , McGinnis, J. Randy , Hestness, Emily , Riedinger, Kelly , Marbach-Ad, Gili , Dai, Amy
and Pease, Rebecca(2010) 'Professional Identity Development of Teacher Candidates Participating in an Informal Science
Education Internship: A focus on drawings as evidence', International Journal of Science Education,, First published on:
26 August 2010 (iFirst)
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2010.489928
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.489928
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
International Journal of Science Education
2010, 1–29, iFirst Article
ISSN 0950-0693 (print)/ISSN 1464-5289 (online)/10/000001–29
© 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2010.489928
RESEARCH REPORT
Professional Identity Development of
Teacher Candidates Participating in an
Informal Science Education Internship:
A focus on drawings as evidence
Phyllis Katza*, J. Randy McGinnisa, Emily Hestnessa, Kelly
Riedingera, Gili Marbach-Adb, Amy Daia and Rebecca Peasea
aDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Maryland, Maryland, USA;
bCollege of Chemical and Life Sciences, University of Maryland, Maryland, USA
Taylor and FrancisTSED_A_489928.sgm10.1080/09500693.2010.489928International Journal of Science Education0950-0693 (print)/1464-5289 (online)Original Article
2010Taylor & Francis0000000002010Dr. PhyllisKatzpkatz15@gmail.com
This study investigated the professional identity development of teacher candidates participating in
an informal afterschool science internship in a formal science teacher preparation programme. We
used a qualitative research methodology. Data were collected from the teacher candidates, their
informal internship mentors, and the researchers. The data were analysed through an identity
development theoretical framework, informed by participants’ mental models of science teaching
and learning. We learned that the experience in an afterschool informal internship encouraged the
teacher candidates to see themselves, and to be seen by others, as enacting key recommendations
by science education standards documents, including exhibiting: positive attitudes, sensitivity to
diversity, and increasing confidence in facilitating hands-on science participation, inquiry, and
collaborative work. Our study provided evidence that the infusion of an informal science education
internship in a formal science teacher education programme influenced positively participants’
professional identity development as science teachers.
Keywords: Informal education; Pre-service
Introduction
The need for quality teacher preparation and professional development
programmes emphasized in worldwide science education reform efforts recognizes
*Corresponding author. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Maryland,
Project Nexus, Room 2226, Benjamin Building, College Park, MD 20742, USA. Email:
pkatz15@gmail.com
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
2P. Katz et al.
the central role of teachers in promoting and improving science literacy. For exam-
ple, a recent report from the European Union based on seminars held in 2006 to
discuss the state of science education recommends a significant long-range invest-
ment in the professional development of those who teach science to sustain their
science knowledge, innovative pedagogy, and their skills (Osborne & Dillon, 2008).
The Australian Science Teachers Association (2009) establishes standards for
‘highly accomplished teachers of science’ enumerating a broad, deep, and current
knowledge of content as well as understanding the socio-cultural, environmental,
economic, and ethical implications of science. In the USA, the National Science
Education Standards call for teachers to practice active involvement in scientific
investigations; to be introduced to resources that expand their knowledge and abil-
ity to access further knowledge; to build on present science understandings, abili-
ties, and attitudes; and to engage in collaborative science learning experiences
(National Research Council, 1996).
Yet, despite the emphasis of reform efforts to improve science teacher preparation
and professional development, particularly at the primary or elementary level, many
teachers report entering the classroom feeling inadequately prepared to teach science
(Kelly, 2000). The situation is thought to be attributable to a number of factors,
including the didactic nature of the science courses teachers have themselves
experienced, or the disconnect between the teaching methods advocated in science
methods courses and the textbook or lecture-based methods still practiced in many
schools (Kelly, 2000). As a result, there is an evident need for innovative and effec-
tive science teacher preparation and professional development opportunities. Tobin,
Tippins, and Gallard (1994) argued that if systemic change is to be achieved,
teacher education programmes must alter the way teachers are prepared to teach
science. One possibility is to look to science education that occurs outside of school
systems. The term informal science education is used to differentiate science teaching
and learning from that within schools.
Rennie (2007) defined informal science education as the science learning that
takes place in contexts outside of the formal school setting. Crane (1994) identified
several distinct characteristics of informal science education and suggested that
informal activities ‘occur outside the school setting, are not developed primarily for
school use, are not developed to be part of an ongoing school curriculum, and are
characterized by voluntary as opposed to mandatory participation as part of a
credited school experience’ (p. 3). Other researchers have contributed additional
distinguishing features of informal science education: learning is self-motivated, the
content is often non-sequential, learning is socially constructed and guided by the
learner’s needs and interests, and there is no formal assessment (Falk, 2001;
Hofstein & Rosenfeld, 1996; Rennie, 2007; Rennie, Feher, Dierking, & Falk,
2003).
A growing body of research has highlighted the value of informal science learning
and has advocated making connections between the formal and informal domains
to support teacher preparation and professional development. Experiences in
informal learning environments can supplement and enhance the knowledge and
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 3
practices that teachers acquire in formal science education settings (Anderson,
Druger, James, Katz, & Ernisse, 2001; Bybee, 2001; Dierking, Falk, Rennie,
Anderson, & Ellenbogen, 2003; Jung & Tonso, 2006; Kelly, 2000; Rennie, 2007).
In addition, informal learning environments such as museums, zoos, and commu-
nity-based programmes can play an integral role in addressing science education
reform goals. The US National Science Education Standards (National Research
Council, 1996) explicitly call for learning opportunities that extend beyond the
classroom. The unique characteristics of informal science education settings offered
benefits for formal science teacher preparation programmes. Studies that have
investigated the inclusion of informal science education settings in formal teacher
preparation reported a number of perceived benefits for teacher candidates. There
were themes that emerged in the literature. These themes clustered around affec-
tive benefits, exposure to new teaching strategies, and the development of beliefs
concerning the teaching and learning of science.
Affective Benefits1
The literature on informal science education suggested that as a primary goal,
many programmes focus on variables related to affective dimensions of learning
and may have a unique potential to impact teacher candidates’ attitudes toward
and interest in science (Crane, 1994; Dori & Tal, 2000; Meredith, Fortner, &
Mullins, 1997). Falk (2001) argued that because museums and other informal
programmes offer resources not necessarily available in formal school settings,
learning in these settings could nurture curiosity, improve motivation, and foster
positive attitudes toward science. Utilizing a science centre for a science methods
course, Chesebrough (1994) reported that after participating, teacher candidates
demonstrated improved attitudes as a result of the hands-on focus, the enthusiasm
and modelling of the instructors, and the unique resources available. Similarly,
Ferry’s (1995) study reported that a science centre-based teaching practicum had a
very high impact on students’ curiosity and interest in science. Participants
commented that the informal environment made science fun and relevant to their
own lives. Ferry’s study further suggested that the inclusion of informal science
education in teacher preparation may support other affective dimensions, such as
teacher candidates’ confidence. Teacher candidates reported that the experience
improved their self-confidence to understand and teach science. Ferry suggested
that the non-threatening and supportive nature of the science centre was a
significant factor.
Exposure to Transformative Pedagogy
Anderson, Lawson, and Mayer-Smith (2006) studied teacher candidates participat-
ing in an aquarium-based teaching practicum. They reported that, in some cases, the
experience provided teacher candidates an initial opportunity to see hands-on
teaching methods and the theory of constructivism modelled. Studies of teacher
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
4P. Katz et al.
candidates’ experiences of teaching in other informal settings, such as afterschool
programmes (Cox-Petersen, Spencer, & Crawford, 2005; Spencer, Cox-Petersen, &
Crawford, 2005) and science camps (Naizer, Bell, West, & Chambers, 2003),
suggested that these contexts allow opportunities to experiment with implementing
transformative teaching strategies.
Beliefs Concerning the Teaching and Learning of Science
Several studies have reported that experiences of teaching science in informal learn-
ing environments can provide teacher candidates with a more informed understand-
ing of learning theories and how these may be translated into practice. Anderson
et al. (2006) found that the aquarium practicum provided a first opportunity for
several teacher candidates to truly see constructivism in use. With regard to translat-
ing these understandings into practice, Kelly (2000) reported that participating in a
science methods course that included a museum-based teaching practicum helped
96% of participants achieve a better understanding of constructivism and its
implications for teaching science. Similarly, Jung and Tonso (2006) found that out-
of-school teaching practice made the idea of constructivist teaching concrete for
interns.
Beyond changing teacher candidates’ beliefs concerning science learning, informal
settings have the potential to foster development of their epistemologies of science
teaching. Anderson et al. (2006) reported that teacher candidates ‘clearly trans-
formed and broadened their epistemologies and pedagogies of teaching’ (p. 351)
after participating in an aquarium-based teaching practicum. They came to see
science teaching as more than covering a prescribed curriculum, but also as a way to
highlight big picture concepts, such as conservation, that they now believed were
valuable for students to understand. Kelly (2000) found that by teaching science in a
museum, teacher candidates came to value science as a process, placing less focus on
finding ‘all the right answers’ and more focus on actually doing science with
students. By experiencing science teaching in new contexts, teacher candidates
became open to new philosophies of what it means to teach science.
Thus, we found that prior teacher preparation programmes, connecting informal
and formal science education, may alter pre-service teachers’ views about the nature
of science teaching and learning, build confidence, develop identities, and supple-
ment learning that occurs in the formal setting (Anderson et al., 2006).
With this research in mind, the Project Nexus (PN) introduced several innova-
tions to address the need to alter teacher preparation, among them an informal
science internship. The informal afterschool science internship component of PN
was aimed at reinforcing or expanding teacher candidates’ beliefs of science teaching
and learning in ways consistent with prominent science education standards docu-
ments from the international, US, informal, and formal science education sectors
(American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1993; National Research
Council, 1996, 2009; National Science Teachers Association, 2004; Osborne &
Dillon, 2008). From these documents, we distilled two goals for teacher education
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 5
in science that we believed applied most directly to including informal science
education in formal science teacher education preparation: to assist teacher
candidates in developing: (1) confidence and enthusiasm toward science teaching,
and (2) beliefs concerning the teaching and learning of science that supported
reform-based pedagogy.
The research goal for the project’s inclusion of the informal science education
internship thus became the following questions: How and in what ways did this
informal science education internship influence undergraduate teacher candidates’
beliefs of science teaching and of themselves as teachers of science? In what ways, if
any, were the teacher candidates’ professional identities aligning with reform-based
practices?
Identity Development as a Lens
A recognized challenge to changing new teachers’ beliefs concerning the teaching
and learning of science has been the tenacity of patterns of teaching as one has been
taught (Clift & Brady, 2005; Zeichner & Tabachnick, 1981). Researchers have
suggested that a useful avenue to explore in addressing resistance to such change is
to focus on new teachers’ images of their ‘ideal self as teacher’ (Eick & Reed, 2002,
p. 402). This image may be influenced by experiences of teaching and learning both
in and out of school. Based on this thinking, we decided to use a professional iden-
tity development lens as a way to understand how teacher candidates’ images or
beliefs about teaching and learning science may relate to their view of themselves as
future science teachers.
Professional identity may play a critical role in whether and how educators
choose to teach science in a transformative manner. Gee (2001) suggested four
aspects of identity: nature identity, institutional identity, discourse identity, and
affinity identity. The second view, institutional identity, may be the most informa-
tive in elucidating differences between educators’ identities in formal and informal
science settings. Gee described institutional identity as a position authorized by the
rules, laws, traditions, and principles of an institution. Formal classroom settings
(e.g. public and private schools) operate according to the rules set by the local,
state, and national education boards. As a result, teachers in these settings follow
prescribed curricula, abide by certain rules as determined by school and district
personnel, and are often evaluated based on their students’ performance on tradi-
tional assessment measures. Informal settings, conversely, are characterized by
different institutional rules and traditions. Experiences in these settings are not
developed as part of a prescribed curriculum and are often not formally assessed
(Crane, 1994). Recently, Luehmann (2007) posited that developing professional
identities that align with reform-based science teaching among educators is crucial
for implementing transformative science teaching practices. She contended that
educators’ personal histories and stories influence their identities as reform-oriented
science educators. In addition, she articulated the potential advantages of out-of-
school settings for developing educators’ identities as reform-oriented science
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
6P. Katz et al.
teachers, stating that experiences in these contexts are supportive for teaching in a
transformative manner. Luehmann (2007) used inquiry-based instruction to exem-
plify this notion: ‘out-of-school teaching of students (for example, running a science
camp) opens the door for the possibility of trying out inquiry-based instructional
strategies with fewer students, less academic accountability, fewer institutional
hurdles, and more support (from peers as well as the university)’ (p. 832). Related
to this notion, we wanted to investigate whether an experience in an out-of-school
context could develop teacher candidates’ professional identities in ways that
complement and enhance their identity development from experiences in formal
settings.
In addition to how Gee (2001) and Luehmann (2007) conceptualized identity,
Sfard and Prusak (2005) contended that identity development is prompted through
communication with others. They suggested that ‘identities may be defined as
collections of stories about persons or, more specifically, as those narratives about
individuals that are reifying, endorsable, and significant’ (2005, p. 16). For this and
other reasons discussed later in the ‘Methods’ section of this paper, we decided to
ask our participants to draw as well as ‘tell’ their stories of themselves as teachers of
science.
Methods
Context of the Study
Hands On Science Outreach (HOSO). Teacher candidates in PN had the option to
participate in an informal internship with HOSO, an afterschool science programme
for elementary aged students. The HOSO programme was designed for small clus-
tered groups based on age/grade to take into account children’s general prior experi-
ence and physical development. The programme included four groups (Pre-K, K-1,
Grades 2–3, and Grades 4–6). The activities focused on the potential science explo-
rations in games, toys, music, arts and crafts, and simple science experiments. For
all of the activities, the materials were sent home with each child for family
discussion, display, and/or re-use.
To offer this science enrichment opportunity from preschool through the elemen-
tary school grades, HOSO developers prepared a three-year cycle utilizing Patterns,
Energy, and Structure and Change as overall themes. Katz and McGinnis (1999)
worked to align programme themes with the National Science Education Standards.
The yearly cycles were divided into three sets of eight-week sessions. The eight-week
sessions were organized around a sub-theme corresponding to the overall yearly
cycle topic (i.e. Patterns, Energy, and Structure and Change). HOSO provided three
components for quality science enrichment programming: inquiry-based activity
guides for adults leading the groups, required training for Adult Leaders prior to
each session, and kits of materials for the activities in the guides.
The PN interns participated in the spring session of Structure and Change, which
centred on weather and geology concepts. The interns participated in an adapted
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 7
version of the HOSO training and then were placed alongside adult leaders during
afterschool sessions with student groups. While placements were sought in the oldest
groups (for experience with early adolescents), time and distance constraints put
some interns into the second and third grade settings. We considered that the
science-focused experience weighed more heavily than the age match. During the
spring session, second and third grade groups attended Rocky Road; fourth through
sixth graders spent their eight weeks in Terra Quest (both were sub-themes during
the Structure and Change yearly cycle). The interns were provided with activity
guides emphasizing inquiry (questions, discussions, reflective time), materials
manipulation, and the pleasure of investigation. Tables 1 and 2 provide a summary
of the investigations, questions, and data collection activities for Rocky Road and
Terra Quest, respectively.
Participants. Twenty-five teacher candidates volunteered for the informal science
education internship that was offered during the spring semester of 2007.2 They
were in the first, second, or third year (with the mode being third year) of their
undergraduate four-year elementary (Grades 1–8) teacher education programme.
They were all accepted to the PN/HOSO informal science internship after an
application process that screened for interest. The teacher candidates received an
honorarium for successful participation in the internship. The 25 teacher candidates
were diverse (4 African American females, 1 African American male, 3 Asian/Pacific
Islander females, 14 White females, 2 Hispanic females, and 1 Other female). The
adult leaders in whose classes they observed and worked received a smaller
honorarium (in addition to their programme stipends) to provide evaluative and
observational data on the interns.
Data Collection
In our study we decided to use mental modelling as a productive way to collect and
communicate data on our participating teacher candidates’ beliefs that related to
their professional identity as science teachers. We were particularly interested in
documenting and communicating the ways in which the teacher candidates’ mental
models of science teaching and learning might evolve as they experienced a new
science teaching context, an internship in an informal afterschool science
programme. Mental model theory suggests that humans create internal mental
representations in order to better understand the world and their experiences in it
(Norman, 1984). Gomez, Hadner, and Housner (1996) added that individuals use
mental models not only to understand the world, but also to operate on it. Humans
develop these mental models through experiences in diverse learning contexts, and
may modify their mental models as they gain new knowledge and experiences.
Researchers believe that mental models play a crucial role in human reasoning and
prediction, and may be called upon for the purposes of answering questions and
solving problems (Eilam, 2004; Livingston & Borko, 1990; Vosniadou & Brewer,
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
8P. Katz et al.
Table 1. Grades 2–3 Rocky Road (Earth Science)
Investigation questions
guiding leaders, parents, and children
Summary/relevance questions
Connecting to the children’s lives Data collection and analysis activities
1. What is fool’s gold? What is a streak test? Where
are the major deposits of gold?
Why do you think gold is so valuable? Examination of pyrite and streak test
comparisons
2. What is halite? What do salt crystals look like?
How can you make a model?
How do you use salt in your home? Observations of halite and comparisons to
table salt
3. How can you make dirt from a rock? What
happens to streams when it rains? Is there erosion at
your site?
How can erosion be a problem? Comparison of water splash measurements
from different heights. Comparison of
simulated steam bed angles and erosion
patterns
4. How are sedimentary rocks formed? What do we
find when we examine a piece of sedimentary rock?
Do you think sandstone would make a
good building material? Explain.
N/A
5. How do we simulate the foamy rock of pumice?
Where are volcanoes found? How do obsidian and
pumice compare?
How do you think you might use
obsidian and pumice rocks? What things
would pumice be better for than obsidian
and vice versa?
Comparison of igneous rocks
6. What objects attract magnets? What are some
forms of iron and their uses?
How do magnets help us? Examination of hematite and items attracted to
magnets
7. What do chalk, limestone, and marble have in
common? How do we test for calcium carbonate?
What are the buffering effects?
Can you think of any ways that we could
help prevent the damage caused to
statues and buildings made from marble
by acid rain?
Comparison of chalk, limestone, and marble
and their reactions to vinegar
8. How do we put all of our rock and mineral
samples together and begin to classify them in a
collection?
Which of these rocks do you think is the
most useful to you? Why?
Summary, analysis, and categorizing of rock
data from class series
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 9
Table 2. Grades 4–6 Te rra Quest (Earth Science)
Investigation questions Summary/relevance questions
Data collection and analysis
activities
1. How do the temperatures in and outside the
building compare? How does a thermometer
compare to a biodot?
When would measuring our body temperature be
important?
Temperature readings with
thermometers and biodots. Data
comparisons
2. What is humidity? How can you measure relative
humidity? What is a hygroscopic material?
How could a change in humidity affect the things that
you do?
Sponge saturation
measurement. Humidity
measurement and psychrometer
chart analysis
3. How do you measure acid rain? How does soil
type affect acid rain damage?
What could be done besides spreading lime all over the
world to minimize the effects of acid rain?
Measuring pH of sample liquids
and soils with hydrion papers
4. What can amber tell us about the history of life
on earth? Are there pieces in your gravel sample?
How might plant and animal materials found in amber
tell us what the earth was like many thousands of years
ago?
5. Is a sand and gravel filter enough to clean water?
How can you increase the safety of a trash dump?
What do you think we should do with our trash when
the local dump is full?
Comparison of sand/gravel
filtering in model toxic leak
6. What is air pressure? How can we measure the
changes that occur in air pressure?
When would you need to change air pressure? Measurements and comparisons
of air pressure with constructed
aneroid barometers
7. How can you gauge the fury of the wind? How is
the Beaufort wind scale used to determine wind
speed?
When might you need to know how fast the wind is
blowing?
Measurements of wind speed.
Learn to use Beaufort wind scale
8. What are various forms of weather? How can you
tell how far away a storm is? Do folk stories about
weather have any scientific basis?
What dramatic changes in the weather, do you think,
could cause animal extinctions?
Observations of cold–hot water
mixtures to consider air flows in
weather patterns
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
10 P. Katz et al.
1992). A number of studies in science education have investigated the ways in
which students call upon their mental models of scientific phenomena to reason
scientifically and answer questions (Coll & Treagust, 2003; Gentner & Gentner,
1983). In such studies, researchers have suggested that mental models are often
constrained by the individual’s conceptual understanding, prior experience, and
pre-existing knowledge (Shepardson, Wee, Priddy, & Harbor, 2007; Vosniadou &
Brewer, 1992).
We wanted to investigate whether the same was true for teacher candidates’
conceptualizations of science teaching and learning: To what extent were their
mental models shaped by their prior knowledge and experiences, and how might
their mental models influence their thinking about themselves as future science
teachers (i.e. their professional identities)? Further, would an experience teaching
science in an informal setting change the nature of teacher candidates’ mental
models of science teaching and learning? Vermunt and Verloop (1999) suggested
that teachers develop habitual patterns of teaching that are linked to their teaching
orientations and their mental models of teaching. Likewise, they believed that the
students’ mental models of learning influence their interpretations of learning tasks
and objectives. Windschitl (1999) suggested:
Our personal histories furnish us with mental models of teaching, and these models of
how we were taught shape our behavior in powerful ways. Teachers use these models to
imagine lessons in their classrooms, develop innovations, and plan for learning. These
images serve to organize sets of beliefs and guide curricular actions. Teachers are more
likely to be guided not by instructional theories, but by the familiar images of what is
‘proper and possible’ in classroom settings. (pp. 752–753)
Because mental models are internal and unique to the individual, eliciting infor-
mation about an individual’s mental model can become a difficult task for the
researcher (Coll & Treagust, 2003). To gain insight into our interns’ mental
models of science teaching and learning, we engaged them in drawing activities
before and after their experience in the informal afterschool science internship. We
argued that there is a precedent for the use of drawings in mental models research
(Vosniadou & Brewer, 1992). Besides drawings, we also conducted interviews and
engaged participants in written reflections in an effort to better understand their
mental models of teaching and learning and how these might have changed with
experience.
Drawings. We believed that the use of drawings as a data collection method appro-
priately reflected the informal nature of the internship context. In analysing the
teacher candidates’ drawings, we were particularly interested in the changes between
their pre- and post-internship responses to the drawing prompt. Chambers (1983)
first published work on the use of drawings as a way to gain insight into individual’s
thinking when he investigated student images of scientists. White and Gunstone
(1992) asserted that the use of drawings as data was beneficial in that it provided
participants with an opportunity for self-expression, gave a means of visually
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 11
representing ideas, and had the potential to reveal unforeseen information. In our
study, we adapted the Draw a scientist test and asked interns to respond to two modi-
fied prompts: Draw yourself teaching science and Draw your students learning science.
These two prompts allowed us to analyse the similarities and differences between the
teacher candidates’ illustrations of their teaching actions and their students’ learning
actions.
Email questions. During spring 2008 we decided to collect additional data by way of
email delivered questions to a purposive selection of our sample. We wanted to
probe more deeply the tentative findings that had emerged from our analysis of the
full sample’s dataset (N = 29) as a member check on our own interpretations. We
selected 10 interns to contact based on their earlier responses. The selection of these
10 interns was made to provide a representative sample with the least amount of
redundancy.
We sent a series of the same three emails to the interns. To the first email, we
attached five open-ended questions as well as electronic scans of their original draw-
ings in response to the prompt Draw yourself teaching science (see Table 3). The
second email contained the same questions and scans of original drawings from the
prompt Draw your students learning science. For the final email, we sent personalized
questions based on our interpretations of the intern’s responses to the questions (e.g.
‘in response to the question … you stated … We interpret your statement to mean …
Do you agree with our conclusion? Please explain’). We also asked interns about
how the HOSO experience changed or supported their ideas about teaching science
and whether or not they believed the effort to participate in an afterschool, informal
science education internship was worthwhile.
Table 3. Open-ended questions from member check
Questions submitted via email with teacher candidates’ drawings
1. Describe what is happening in your drawings
(a) Pre-internship
(b) Post-internship
2. What similarities or differences do you see in how you illustrated hands-on science learning in
your pre- and post-internship drawings?
(a) To what do you attribute any changes?
3. What similarities or differences do you see in how you illustrated collaborative science
learning in your pre- and post-internship drawings?
(a) To what do you attribute any changes?
4. What similarities or differences do you see in how you illustrated science inquiry in your
pre- and post-internship drawings?
(a) To what do you attribute any changes?
5. Please share any further thoughts on your HOSO internship experience and how that
experience may have influenced your thinking about science teaching.
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
12 P. Katz et al.
Analysis
Categorical analysis. As a first step in analysing the data, we interpreted the draw-
ings through the use of a categorical analysis. Independently, two of the researchers
coded the drawings using a modified coding scheme developed by Katz (2003).
The codes included identification of surface features and science processes.
Specifically, each drawing was coded for: students’ gender, image inclusion,
teacher expression, students’ expression, ethnicity of teacher, ethnicity of students,
activity type, setting, and science processes (e.g. observing, experimenting, predict-
ing) as referenced in the National Science Education Standards (National Research
Council, 1996). After independently coding the drawings, any differences in inter-
pretation (very few) were brought to the larger research group and negotiated until
a consensus emerged. Initially, we used the surface features and science process
codes to interpret the drawings. We found that the high number of science process
coding categories obscured possible trends in the data by placing too much atten-
tion on a micro-grain analysis. As a result, we decided to recode evidence of
science teaching and learning depicted in the drawings using three categories that
encompassed the main goals of the HOSO programme: hands-on science, collabo-
ration, and inquiry.
Mental model analysis. By analysing the components of teacher candidates’ drawings
before and after the informal afterschool science internship, we gained insight into
their changing mental models of what it means to teach and learn science. We also
looked for evidence that the informal afterschool science teaching experience helped
to foster reform-oriented thinking for the teacher candidates; that is, we investigated
changes in their representations of transformative pedagogy, of the nature of science
teaching and learning, of confidence and enthusiasm toward science teaching, and of
their own capacities to transform school science. These broader categories were
consistent with major goals for science education articulated in prominent science
education reform documents. Focusing our attention on identifying the presence or
absence of evidence for these three categorical areas allowed us to draw conclusions
regarding the beliefs our interns held concerning the critical goals.
We used a mental model analysis to gain insight into the ways teacher candidates
viewed themselves in the context of science teaching and learning, and the ways
others would view them. The drawings and member check responses prompted
teacher candidates to represent their mental models of science teaching and learning
as teacher candidates drew and described components that were salient to them. In
interpreting the teacher candidates’ mental models, we used an inductive approach
and identified themes that emerged from the data. The mental models provided a
lens through which we could explore how the teachers’ were identifying as reform-
oriented teachers of science.
Identity analysis. We used identity theory as another lens to address how teacher
candidates came to see themselves as teachers of science and came to be seen by
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 13
others in the science education community following participation in an informal
science internship. We believe that the mental models framework provided us with
information about teacher candidates’ thinking at a given time, while the identity
framework afforded a narrative of their development over time as transformative
teachers of science. We used a deductive approach to connect teacher candidates’
mental models of science teaching and learning with reform-based goals articulated
in prominent science education documents (international, US, informal, and
formal). Using this approach, we were able to consider how the science education
community would come to view the teacher candidates’ identities, as well as how the
teacher candidates themselves would come to view their identities as transformative
teachers of science following completion of the informal afterschool science
internship.
When we investigated what influence the informal science internship had on
developing their concept of transformative teaching, we looked for evidence of
inquiry-based science investigations illustrated through question marks, questions in
speech bubbles, or intern notes on the drawing pages. We looked for evidence of
active science, noting the presence of materials, how they were distributed and being
used, and whether their use was eliciting discussion. We looked for evidence of
collaboration by how the students were arranged and how they appeared to be
communicating. We considered the setting and whether the intern was expressing a
variety of resources by illustrating items not typically found in a classroom or by
depicting science instruction taking place outside of a classroom.
Findings
We selected four participants from our total sample (pilot study and scale-up study,
N = 29) to represent our findings. These four participants illustrate the patterns of
responses we found when we analysed all the participants’ data. In particular, we
coded the data for two categories: evidence of transformative pedagogy and enthusi-
asm for science and science teaching and learning. For the transformative pedagogy
category, we selected three participants, Lindsey (White female), Sasha (White
female), and Gina (Asian/Pacific Islander female) to represent three aspects of
transformative pedagogy, respectively: collaboration, inquiry, and hands-on science.
Rachel (African-American female) was selected to represent the second category,
enthusiasm. These four participants expressed their ideas related to the targeted two
categories in rich detail both in their drawings and their interview responses. We
report elements of each teacher candidate’s mental model of science teaching and
science learning both before and after their participation in the informal afterschool
science internship.
Focal Study: Lindsey (White Female)
Lindsey’s case represented an example of a teacher candidate whose drawings
provide evidence of growth in developing an identity as a transformative teacher of
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
14 P. Katz et al.
science, particularly with regard to the use of collaborative learning. We interpreted
her drawings to move toward a view of science teaching and learning as active rather
than passive, and as a collaborative rather than solitary endeavour. In our initial
interpretations of Lindsey’s pre-internship drawings, we saw little evidence that
Lindsey viewed hands-on learning, collaboration, or inquiry as central elements of
science teaching and learning. In her pre-internship Draw yourself teaching science
drawing (Figure 1A), Lindsey depicted herself conducting a science demonstration
as a group of students observe. She appeared to identify the teacher (herself) as the
main actor in the science classroom, and the students as passive observers. After
engaging in the informal afterschool science internship, Lindsey’s depiction of her
own science teaching was strikingly different (Figure 1B). She depicted students
seated together, preparing to engage in a hands-on activity, carefully indicating
materials for each student. She placed herself seated in the circle with her students
to help guide their own explorations, rather than standing in front of them as a
demonstrator. In responding to the changes in her drawings, Lindsey stated: ‘I defi-
nitely believe that students learn better through the discourse that is created in group
learning … I think that the HOSO programme did an excellent job with that … The
adult leader guides the conversation rather than dominates it’ (Email, 2008).
Figure 1. Lindsey’s response to the prompt: Draw yourself teaching science
Lindsey’s Draw your students learning science drawings further demonstrated the
same themes. Before the informal afterschool science internship, Lindsey illus-
trated students standing in isolation, with no evidence of interaction between
students or with science materials (Figure 2A). She explained that her drawing
showed students ‘separated and examining various objects individually. They are
standing near the tables, but not really working with the materials’ (Email, 2008).
In the post-internship drawing, Lindsey again reconfigured students into a circle
Figure 1. Lindsey’s response to the prompt: Draw yourself teaching science
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 15
and provided each child with materials to use (Figure 2B). An important compo-
nent of her mental model appeared to have become active students who engage
with materials and with one another. Lindsey commented that in the post-
internship drawing, ‘students are working together and sharing ideas with each
other … [and] look like they are much more hands-on in their learning’ (Email
follow-up study, 2008).
Figure 2. Lindsey’s response to the prompt: Draw your students learning science
In commenting on the changes between her drawings, Lindsey provided evidence
that she was developing an identity that incorporated elements of transformative
pedagogy and beliefs of science teaching and learning. She writes:
HOSO made me much more confident in my ability to make science interactive and
educational for my students. My science lessons are much more hands-on and engaging
for my students. I think that the programme has made me more likely to take risks with
science lessons in my classroom, and view science as something I want to do with my
students as opposed to have to. (Email, 2008)
Focal Study: Gina (Asian/Pacific Islander Female)
We identified Gina as a teacher candidate whose drawings provide evidence of her
developing identity as a teacher of science who values engaging her students in
hands-on learning, a crucial element of transformative pedagogy in science. In each
set of drawings (Draw yourself teaching science; Draw your students learning science), the
ways that Gina represents science education changes dramatically after her engage-
ment in the informal afterschool science internship. Before the informal internship,
Gina appeared to hold a formal, lecture-based mental model of her own science
teaching. In her pre-internship ‘Draw yourself teaching’ drawing (Figure 3A), she
depicts herself at the front of the classroom, demonstrating with science materials
Figure 2. Lindsey’s response to the prompt: Draw your students learning science
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
16 P. Katz et al.
(of which the teacher is the sole handler). After the informal afterschool science
internship, Gina appears to perceive the teacher’s role as guiding and encouraging
students while they worked together and made their own discoveries (Figure 3B). In
comparing her pre- and post-internship drawings, Gina comments that she
attributed this change to her participation in the HOSO internship, stating, ‘The
programme emphasizes the type of learning shown in the second picture, where the
children are very interactive. After my internship, that’s the way I began to view
science’ (Email, 2008). Her mental model of teaching includes opportunities for
students to collaborate with one another and enjoy their participation in science.
Gina commented, ‘I understand that science needs to be a collaborative process in
order for it to be successful. This success can be defined as the students learning and
having fun’ (Email, 2008). She now appears to view the science teacher’s role as not
only providing information, but also as helping to make science enjoyable. The
students handling the materials in the post-internship drawing indicate that her
mental model of science teaching now includes students as active participants rather
than passive observers in the science classroom.
Figure 3. Gina’s response to the prompt: Draw yourself teaching science
In depicting her students’ science learning (Figure 4A), Gina begins again by
illustrating a formal, lecture-based classroom similar to the one she has drawn in her
pre-internship ‘Draw yourself teaching’ drawing (Figure 3A). Students are sitting at
desks filling out worksheets as they listen to a lecture, and responding to questions
posed to them. At this point, student interaction with materials or with one another
is apparently not present in her mental model of science learning. After participating
in the informal afterschool science internship, Gina’s mental model of science learn-
ing has changed considerably. In the post-internship ‘Draw your students learning’
drawing (Figure 4B), she depicts her students participating in outdoor science
explorations together and emphasizes the importance of collaboration between
Figure 3. Gina’s response to the prompt: Draw yourself teaching science
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 17
students. She notes that not all of the students are participating in the same activity
and states that ‘the children are questioning themselves and each other to inquire
what is happening’ (Email, 2008). This statement may represent an interesting
change in her conception of inquiry as it applies to her students’ science learning.
Rather than responding to questions posed by the teacher or written on a worksheet
(as in the pre-internship drawing), she indicates that students are developing and
investigating their own questions and ‘making their own conclusions and discover-
ies’ (Email, 2008). Gina mentioned that in her education courses as well as in the
internship, she began thinking about how to give students guidelines without limit-
ing their exploration (Email, 2008). She again emphasizes student enjoyment in this
post-internship drawing, and noted that students enjoy the opportunity to learn
science in settings outside of the classroom (Email, 2008).
Figure 4. Gina’s response to the prompt: Draw your students learning science
Gina’s comments about her drawings suggest that she is beginning to develop an
image of her ‘ideal self’ as a teacher of science, and an understanding of the practices
of transformative science education. She writes:
I hope I have the opportunity to teach in a school system that allows me to teach in a
manner that is illustrated by the second picture. Unfortunately, there are school systems
that do not believe that science learning should be anything but textbook and worksheets.
I don’t think this is the best way to approach science. The programme emphasizes the
type of learning shown in the second picture, where the children are very interactive.
After my internship, that’s the way I began to view science learning. (Email, 2008)
Focal Study: Rachel (African American Female)
We selected Rachel’s case as illustrative of movement toward the goal of developing
confidence and enthusiasm toward science teaching, an important aim of transformative
Figure 4. Gina’s response to the prompt: Draw your students learning science
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
18 P. Katz et al.
teacher education in science. Further, it appears that the informal nature of the
HOSO internship was particularly beneficial in helping Rachel to identify as a capable
teacher of science. Before participating in the informal afterschool science internship,
Rachel was hesitant about science and unsure of her own abilities to teach it. Rachel’s
pre-internship ‘Draw yourself teaching’ drawing (Figure 5A) showed a teacher
behind her desk, reviewing a book that explained how to conduct a science experi-
ment. Rachel expressed some apprehension by stating that ‘I don’t know much about
science’. It appeared that Rachel relied on her book/curriculum guide to ensure that
she carried out her lesson according to a plan. She believed that if she were well
prepared, both teacher and students would have a positive experience in the science
classroom. In the post-internship drawing (Figure 5B), Rachel again depicted herself
behind a desk, but also included a group of students sitting at a table preparing to
conduct the experiment she had introduced. In commenting on her post-internship
drawing, Rachel wrote:
My experience was more hands-on than I thought it would be. I walked around and
helped the students with whatever they needed, and I even conducted my own experi-
ment right along with them. A lot of how I taught was by demonstration, not just
explaining. (Email, 2008)
These comments provided insight into some changes in Rachel’s mental model of
science teaching from before to after the internship. Student–teacher interaction
became a new component of her thinking. She viewed herself not only as an
explainer or direction-giver, but as a helper and demonstrator for her students.
Figure 5. Rachel’s response to the prompt: Draw yourself teaching science
Rachel’s ‘Draw your students learning’ drawings were quite different from her
‘Draw yourself teaching’ drawings. Her pre-internship ‘Draw your students learning’
drawing showed groups of students together at tables, conducting and discussing a
hands-on science experiment (Figure 6A). Unlike the pre-internship ‘Draw yourself
Figure 5. Rachel’s response to the prompt: Draw yourself teaching science
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 19
teaching’ drawing, the students had materials and were engaged in doing science. In
the dialogue she showed between students, Rachel depicted one student encourag-
ing another, indicating her awareness of the benefits of peer-to-peer interaction in
the science classroom. After participating in the internship, Rachel appeared to
retain her idea that collaboration and discussion were central to her students’ science
learning (Figure 6B). However, rather than depicting her students collaborating over
a formal lab experiment, Rachel drew her students with art projects. This change
demonstrated a new understanding of how to incorporate other subject areas in
science education to contribute to her students’ learning. The informal nature of the
afterschool programme may have helped Rachel recognize alternative approaches
that would assist her students in learning and enjoying science.
Figure 6. Rachel’s response to the prompt: Draw your students learning science
In her post-internship comments, we saw a considerable change in Rachel’s
feelings about science teaching and learning, and in her sense of herself as a teacher
of science. She wrote:
I completely agree that the HOSO internship changed my ideas about what it means
to teach science. In my opinion, this internship, and any other opportunity to teach
science informally is worthwhile. I believe there is a negative stereotype that goes
along with teaching science. Because the internship was informal, it really gave me a
chance to see how fun and creative you can be when teaching a science lesson. (Email,
2008)
Rachel comments about how having a positive experience with science in the intern-
ship helped counteract some negative prior experiences that she had in her own
science learning. Her comments emphasized that personal histories were critical in
the professional identity development for teachers of science, and that negative expe-
riences with science teaching and learning may lose influence when teacher candi-
dates had opportunities to engage in informal science experiences that provide
positive science teaching and learning experiences:
Figure 6. Rachel’s response to the prompt: Draw your students learning science
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
20 P. Katz et al.
Growing up I was never really a ‘science person’. Most of my memories about science
class are not very exciting, so I think I just assumed my prior experiences would be simi-
lar to my internship experience. Science isn’t as bad as I thought it was! It was made
very simple and easy to teach, and along with the kids, I had a great time (Email, 2008).
Focal Study: Sasha (White Female)
Sasha’s case presented an example of a teacher candidate who entered the informal
science afterschool internship already comfortable with inquiry-based science
teaching and maintained this view through her participation in the internship.
Sasha’s pre-internship ‘Draw yourself teaching’ drawing (Figure 7A) depicted a
teacher standing to the side of a group of students as they worked together with
science materials. In her mental model of teaching, Sasha appeared to view students
as capable of directing many aspects of their learning, and the teacher as a facilitator
of their activities. Prior to the internship, Sasha already placed high importance on
student collaboration in the science classroom, as well as on opportunities for
students to manipulate science materials. She indicated in the drawing that students
were sharing ideas and engaging in discussion as they made discoveries with the
materials. The post-internship ‘Draw yourself teaching’ drawing (Figure 7B) looked
quite similar, but placed the teacher in a more active role: she provided direction to
the students and asked probing questions to promote higher level thinking. Sasha
seemed to recognize that while it was important to allow student exploration with
science materials, it was also beneficial for the teacher to scaffold their learning and
help guide their thinking through questioning. She commented, ‘I saw that students
can easily come to their own conclusions about science with little probing’ (Email,
2008). Sasha appeared to focus more on her own role in creating the best learning
Figure 7. Sasha’s response to the prompt: Draw yourself teaching science
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 21
experience for her students. She wrote that this included being well prepared for the
lesson and providing ‘very structured’ science lessons. It might be interpreted that
this thinking was somewhat at odds with the informal approach to science teaching
that Sasha experienced in her informal afterschool science internship. Sasha
commented that the focus on structure and organization was due to negative experi-
ences she had in the internship: ‘I think I was very focused on the preparation aspect
because I observed my HOSO teacher unprepared prior to experimentation, which
led to very disorganized and chaotic lessons’ (Email, 2008). This statement indi-
cated Sasha’s recognition that meaningful hands-on science took a high level of
thoughtfulness, preparation, and engagement on the part of the teacher.
Figure 7. Sasha’s response to the prompt: Draw yourself teaching science
Sasha’s pre-internship ‘Draw your students learning’ drawing (Figure 8A) again
depicted a group of students working together at a table with science materials.
Sasha drew each individual student with a different thought in mind, indicating her
belief that each student in a collaborative group brought different ideas. Sasha’s
mental model of science learning included hands-on, collaborative work by the
students and involved a number of scientific processes (e.g. observation, prediction,
experimentation). As we saw in her pre-internship ‘Draw yourself teaching’ drawing
(Figure 7A), prior to the internship, Sasha viewed herself as having a somewhat
‘hands-off’ role as her students worked together in the science classroom. In the
post-internship ‘Draw your students learning’ drawing (Figure 8B), there were
many similar elements, but more evidence of discussion and inquiry. The students
were standing at a table with materials, speaking to one another rather than thinking
to themselves. Sasha’s mental model of science learning appeared, after the intern-
ship, to include a considerable level of student dialogue as they engaged in group
investigations.
Figure 8. Sasha’s response to the prompt: Draw your students learning science
Figure 8. Sasha’s response to the prompt: Draw your students learning science
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
22 P. Katz et al.
Sasha’s comments indicated a higher level of awareness about the role of inquiry
in her students’ learning. She wrote that she wanted her students to ‘use inquiry’ and
‘ask questions and find ways to seek out their answers’. While she did not depict
herself in the ‘Draw your students learning’ drawing, Sasha’s comments indicated
new ideas about her identity as a teacher of science. She was beginning to see herself
as a teacher who guided her students as they made sense of science, and took an
active role in her students’ learning. She wrote:
While I watched inquiry-based science instruction implemented during my HOSO
internship, I recognized that students need to think critically about the scientific
concepts they explore in order to gain a better understanding of science. Inquiry alone
will not help all students make important scientific discoveries, and I found that many
of the students I worked with during my HOSO experience needed closure and probing
questions to further their understanding of the concept we were exploring. (Email,
2008)
Summary of the Focal Cases
The four focal cases illustrated the diversity of changes that occurred for our
participants through their experiences with the informal afterschool science intern-
ship. Overall, these cases suggested that the totality of the afterschool informal
science internship fostered changes in the teacher candidates’ thinking about science
teaching and learning, as well as about themselves as future teachers of science.
Comparing participants’ pre- and post-internship Draw yourself teaching science
and Draw your students learning science drawings was useful for gaining insight into
potential changes in teacher candidates’ mental models of science teaching and
learning, as well as in their professional identities as teachers of science. With regard
to mental models of science teaching and learning, the four focal cases exemplified
several ways in which teacher candidates came to reconceptualize the inclusion of
transformative approaches to science education in the areas of hands-on learning,
collaboration, and inquiry. For example, Lindsey, Gina, and Sasha’s drawings all
suggested changes in their mental models which provided evidence for a greater
understanding of transformative pedagogy after participating in the informal
afterschool science internship. Lindsey and Gina both included transformative
approaches in their post-internship drawings that did not appear to be present in
their pre-internship drawings. And while Sasha included transformative
approaches—especially relating to inquiry-based science teaching—in both her pre-
and post-internship drawings, her case suggested not only that the afterschool
informal science internship supported interns in maintaining their use of transforma-
tive approaches like inquiry, but also in learning to apply these in new ways. In each
of these cases, we found evidence that as the interns’ mental models of science
teaching and learning were changing, so were their professional identities as teachers
of science. Lindsey, Gina, and Sasha all appeared to be developing a new sense of
what it meant for them to teach science and how learners learned science. The result
was a more sophisticated view of their ideal selves as teachers of science.
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 23
The focal cases also provided evidence of affective changes for teacher candidates
from the beginning to the end of their participation in the informal afterschool science
internship. For example, Rachel’s case showed changes in her drawings and accom-
panying comments in her confidence and enthusiasm for teaching science. Her
mental models of science teaching and learning appeared to have changed from envi-
sioning science education as an intimidating endeavour to something of which she
believed she was capable and interested in doing. In terms of her professional identity
as a teacher of science, Rachel’s data provided evidence that she came to see herself
as a more confident science teacher who did not have the same hesitations about
science that appeared to be present in her pre-internship drawing and comments.
Discussion
Identity theory posits a relationship between how one regards oneself and how one is
regarded by others (Danielewicz, 2001; Gee, 2001; Luehmann, 2007). In our study,
we were interested in discerning the ways that teacher candidates came to regard
themselves as future science teachers and the ways that others in the science educa-
tion community could regard them as developing in key recommended areas. Our
analysis of the collected data permitted us to draw conclusions in two of the four key
goals of science teacher education that we synthesized: ‘Science teacher preparation
should provide opportunities for teacher candidates to be seen as knowledgeable and
confident in transformative pedagogy (inquiry techniques, active sciencing, collabo-
rative work, a variety of formal and informal resources)’ and ‘Science teacher prepa-
ration should encourage teacher candidates to be seen as modelling enthusiasm for
science as they engage in science teaching’.
Below, we present our discussion by the two goals in science teacher preparation
that we identified as directly relevant to our study.
Science Teacher Preparation Should Provide Opportunities for Teacher Candidates to be
Seen as Knowledgeable and Confident in Transformative Pedagogy (Inquiry Techniques,
Active Sciencing, Collaborative Work, and Use of a Variety of Formal and Informal
Resources)
We posited that transformative pedagogy included a more student-centered
approach that moved closer to the way that professional scientists work—in groups,
handling materials, and questioning authority and each other. The National Science
Teachers Association (2004) asserted that teachers should both understand transfor-
mative pedagogy and find resources to support their teaching. They stated that
teachers should be able to ‘understand processes, tenets and assumptions in multiple
methods of inquiry’ (p. 13) … ‘identify, access, and/or create resources and activities
consistent with standards, … [and] plan and implement to reach National Science
Education Standards goals’ (p. 18).
The recent informal science education document by the National Research Coun-
cil (2009) stated that informal educators should give students opportunities to
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
24 P. Katz et al.
‘manipulate, test, explore, predict, question, observe and make sense of the natural
and physical world’ (p. 4). Osborne and Dillon (2008) described additional transfor-
mative features of science teaching that included opportunities for students to ‘work
in groups, explore written and oral expression, more open-ended, problem-solving
experiences’ (p. 21). The National Science Education Standards stated that the teach-
ing of science ‘requires integrating knowledge of science, learning, pedagogy and
students—and applying to science teaching. [Teachers and students] use inquiry,
reflection, research, interpretation’ (National Research Council, 1996, p. 62). The
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993) document suggested
that the methods of science are not only useful ways of thinking, but that perhaps a
broader range of situations strengthens the way in which this thinking can transfer
among life’s circumstances.
We found evidence that the teacher candidates who participated in the afterschool
informal science education internship became more knowledgeable and confident in
the recommended transformative pedagogy. For instance, Sasha was very thoughtful
in drawing an image of her students. Both her pre- and post-drawings and her
comments on her drawings illustrated a positive attitude, students with ideas,
reasoning and predicting, using materials, and asking questions (Figures 7A–8B).
However, her internship made her more aware of her necessary role in guiding
student learning. She learned that she needed to ask questions and facilitate
discussion among students as they engaged in inquiry-based science experiences in
order to further their understandings of science concepts. The Adult Leader who
worked with Sasha wrote at first that, ‘the intern rarely asked questions and instead
when a child asked a question [the] intern was prompted to answer the question
rather than to inquire their reasoning behind the question … By the end of her
internship the Leader wrote, ‘the intern asked appropriate questions especially in the
last activity to help children learn the importance of air pressure’ (Adult Leader
reflection, 2007).
We also found evidence of teacher candidates’ knowledge of transformative
pedagogy through their depiction and discussion of collaborative learning.
Lindsey provided an example of movement from a view of students learning in
isolation (pre-internship) to learning together with peers (post-internship) (Figures
2A and 2B).
She writes:
[The students] were definitely more engaged and I think they got a lot more out of it
than just lecture based science. (Interview, 2007)
We interpreted that Lindsey not only saw the benefits of collaborative work for the
students, but that she was thinking about her own role as facilitator and perhaps
learner as a part of the process of responding to students’ communications.
Further evidence of teacher candidates’ knowledge and confidence in transforma-
tive pedagogy came through depictions of active science. The use of drawing as a
data source was particularly informative as a strategy to reveal their thinking (espe-
cially when combined with the member check). We looked for teacher candidates’
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 25
illustrations of hands-on science learning, as well as the discussion and meaning-
making they believed should accompany its use.
In her post-internship ‘Draw your students learning’ drawing, Sasha depicted
students engaged with materials while discussing their ideas (Figure 8B). We believed
that Sasha understood that hands-on learning was important in transformative science
teaching, but that it cannot stand alone without discussion and meaning-making. In
commenting on her drawing, she wrote:
Students should be given the opportunity to explore and use hands on approaches to
make scientific discoveries, but I realized that teachers need to ask probing questions
and facilitate discussions about science in order to further students’ understanding of a
science topic. (Follow-up email, 2008)
While she was concerned with providing students opportunities to explore materi-
als and discuss on their own, we also believed that Sasha had an appropriate sense of
the teacher’s role in guiding these science learning experiences for her students.
One final way we interpreted teacher candidates’ knowledge and comfort with
transformative pedagogy was through their depiction and discussion of the inclusion
of informal science resources and settings. Because each teacher candidate was
preparing to teach in a formal setting, we were interested to see whether they viewed
any elements of the informal afterschool setting as translatable to their future
teaching careers. Gina provided one example of a teacher candidate who moved
from a view of science learning as highly structured and taking place in formal
settings, to a view of science learning as more exploratory and possibly existing
outside of the classroom. In her pre-internship ‘Draw your students learning’
drawing, she drew her students completing worksheets by themselves at desks
(Figure 4A). In the post-internship drawing, students were exploring collaboratively
in a setting outside of the classroom (Figure 4B). These drawings indicated to us a
broadening in Gina’s view of science teaching and learning, with her post-internship
drawing being much more illustrative of transformative pedagogy.
Science Teacher Preparation Should Encourage Teacher Candidates to be Seen as
Modelling Enthusiasm for Science as They Engage in Science Teaching
In its introductory remarks, the National Science Education Standards spoke to the
desired enthusiasm of students and by implication teacher models: ‘The goals for
school science that underlie the National Science Education Standards are to educate
students who are able to experience the richness and excitement of knowing about and
understanding the natural world’ (National Research Council, 1996, p. 13). The Blue-
prints for Reform: Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education state that ‘The enthu-
siasm of a teacher matters in the learning process, and one important way to generate
teacher enthusiasm is to give teachers ownership over what they do’ (American
Association for the Advancement of Science, 1998, p. 108). National Research
Council (2009) addressed informal science education and stated that learners (and
by implication those who prepare learning environments to teach science) ‘experience
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
26 P. Katz et al.
excitement, interest, and motivation to learn about phenomena in the natural and
physical world’ (p. 4). Osborne and Dillon (2008) stated that ‘Good science teachers
… hold a passion for science’ (p. 25). Our participants most frequently stated passion
and enthusiasm for science teaching and learning by the use of the word ‘fun’.
We found evidence of enthusiasm in the use of the word ‘fun’ often to describe
how the interns themselves enjoyed the informal internship experience or valued
making science enjoyable for their students. For example, Gina stated:
I understand that science needs to be a collaborative process in order for it to be
successful. This success can be defined as the students learning and having fun. (Gina,
email, 2008)
Sasha’s post-internship ‘Draw yourself teaching’ drawing provided an example of
how participants illustrated enthusiasm (Figure 8B). In this drawing, she depicted
herself with a smile, enthusiastic body language, and the words ‘Science is fun!’ on
the board.
To conclude, consistent with the research of Chesebrough (1994) and Ferry
(1995), we found that the teacher candidates in this study benefitted from the infor-
mal programme’s focus on affective dimensions. The goals of HOSO focused on
outcomes such as promoting curiosity, sparking students’ interest in science, and
engaging students in science through play. As a result of these unique goals, the
teacher candidates that participated in the afterschool internship experience
demonstrated positive changes in their attitudes and beliefs about science. The
teacher candidates’ professional identities were also influenced as a result of the
afterschool internship experience. As Anderson et al. (2006) reported in their study
of an aquarium practice experience, and as Luehmann (2007) posited, teacher
candidates benefitted from exposure in an informal science education context to
transformative science teaching methods. Teacher candidates observed and partici-
pated in the implementation of hands-on, inquiry-based, and collaborative science
activities with students during the HOSO programme. As a result of the internship,
teacher candidates expressed in their drawings and interview narratives a view that
shifted away from didactic, lecture-based instruction and began to emphasize the
importance of incorporating hands-on, inquiry-based, and collaborative activities in
science instruction. These insights supported those of Anderson et al. (2006) and
Kelly (2000) who suggested that informal internship experiences could help teacher
candidates develop more sophisticated epistemologies of science teaching and
learning.
A major limitation of our study is that it does not examine the actual teaching
practices of the participating teacher candidates in their beginning years of their
career as teachers. Future study is recommended in this area.
Acknowledgements
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under
Grant No. 0455752. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 27
expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the
views of the National Science Foundation.
Notes
1. The content in sections ‘Affective Benefits’, ‘Exposure to Transformative Pedagogy’, and
‘Beliefs Concerning the Teaching and Learning of Science’ was drawn from McGinnis et al.
(in press).
2. During the fall semester of 2006 a small pilot study was conducted. Four interns participated
in the afterschool internship. Refinements were made to the research design and data
collection instruments based on the pilot study.
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New
York: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1998). Blueprints for reform: Science,
mathematics, and technology education. New York: Oxford University Press.
Anderson, A., Druger, M., James, C., Katz, P., & Ernisse, J. (2001). An NSTA position statement
on informal science education. In P. Katz (Ed.), Community connections for science education
(pp. ix–xi). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
Anderson, D., Lawson, B., & Mayer-Smith, J. (2006). Investigating the impact of a practicum
experience in an aquarium on pre-service teachers. Teaching Education, 17(4), 341–353.
Australian Science Teachers Association. (2009). National professional standards for highly accom-
plished teachers of science. Retrieved April 19, 2010, from http://www.asta.edu.au/freestyler/
files/FINAL%20draft%20of%20Science%20Standards.pdf
Bybee, R. (2001). Achieving science literacy: Strategies for insuring that free-choice science educa-
tion complements national formal science education efforts. In J. Falk (Ed.), Free choice science
education (pp. 44–63). New York: Teachers College Press.
Chambers, D. W. (1983). Stereotypic images of the scientist: Draw-a-scientist test. Science
Education, 67(2), 255–265.
Chesebrough, D. (1994). Informal science teacher preparation. Science Education International,
5(2), 28–33.
Clift, R. T., & Brady, P. (2005). Research on methods courses and field experiences. In M.
Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA
panel on research and teacher education (pp. 309–424). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Coll, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Investigation of secondary school, undergraduate, and
graduate learners’ mental models of ionic bonding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
40(5), 464–486.
Cox-Petersen, A. M., Spencer, B. H., & Crawford, J. H. (2005). Developing a community of
teachers through integrated science and literacy service-learning experiences. Issues in Teacher
Education, 14(1), 23–37.
Crane, V. (1994). An introduction to informal science learning and research. In V. Crane, H.
Nicholson, M. Chen, & S. Bitgood (Eds.), Informal science learning: What the research says
about television, science museums, and community-based projects (pp. 1–14). Ephrata, PA: Science
Press.
Danielewicz, J. (2001). Teaching selves. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Dierking, L. D., Falk, J. H., Rennie, L., Anderson, D., & Ellenbogen, K. (2003). Policy statement
of the ‘Informal Science Education’ ad hoc committee. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
40(2), 108–111.
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
28 P. Katz et al.
Dori, Y. J., & Tal, R. T. (2000). Formal and informal collaborative projects: Engaging in industry
with environmental awareness. Science Education, 84(1), 95–113.
Eick, C. J., & Reed, C. J. (2002). What makes an inquiry-oriented science teacher? The influence
of learning histories on student teacher role identity and practice. Science Education, 86(3),
401–416.
Eilam, B. (2004). Drops of water and of soap solution: Students’ constraining mental models of
the nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 970–993.
Falk, J. H. (2001). Free-choice science learning: Framing the discussion. In J. H. Falk (Ed.), Free-
choice science education: How we learn science outside of school (pp. 3–20). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Ferry, B. (1995). Science centers in Australia provide valuable training for preservice teachers.
Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4(3), 255–260.
Gee, J. P. (2001). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in
Education, 25, 99–125.
Gentner, D., & Gentner, D. R. (1983). Flowing waters and teeming crowds: Mental models of
electricity. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.) Mental models (pp. 99–129). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Gomez, R. L., Hadner, O. D., & Housner L. D. (1996). Conceptual maps and simulated teaching
episodes as indicators of competence in teaching elementary mathematics. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 88(3), 572–585.
Hofstein, A., & Rosenfeld, S. (1996). Bridging the gap between formal and informal science
learning. Studies in Science Education, 28, 87–112.
Jung, M. L., & Tonso, K. L. (2006). Elementary preservice teachers learning to teach science in
science museums and nature centers: A novel program’s impact on science knowledge,
science pedagogy, and confidence teaching. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 18(1),
15–31.
Katz, P. (2003, March). Drawing conclusions, part I: Adapting ‘Draw-A-Scientist’ for informal science
education research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for
Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
Katz, P., & McGinnis, J. R. (1999). An informal elementary science education program’s response
to the National Science Education Reform Movement. Journal of Elementary Science Educa-
tion, 11(1), 1–15.
Kelly, J. (2000). Rethinking the elementary science methods course: A case for content, pedagogy,
and informal science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 755–777.
Livingston, C., & Borko, H. (1990). High school mathematics review lessons: Expert–novice
distinctions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(5), 372–387.
Luehmann, A. L. (2007). Identity development as a lens to science teacher preparation. Science
Education, 91(5), 822–839.
McGinnis, J. R., Hestness, E., Riedinger, K., Katz, P., Marbach-Ad, G., & Dai, A. (In press).
Informal science education in formal science teacher preparation. In K. Tobin, B. Frasier, &
C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Meredith, J. E., Fortner, R. W., & Mullins, G. W. (1997). Model of affective learning for nonfor-
mal science education facilities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(8), 805–818.
Naizer, G., Bell, G. L., West, K., & Chambers, S. (2003). Inquiry science professional develop-
ment combined with a science summer camp for immediate application. Journal of Elementary
Science Education, 15(2), 31–37.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC:
National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and
pursuits. Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments. P. Bell, B. Lewenstein, A. W.
Shouse, & M. A. Feder (Eds.). Board on Science Education, Center for Education. Division
of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010
Professional Identity Development 29
National Science Teachers Association. (2004). NSTA position statement on science teacher prepara-
tion. Retrieved October 2008, from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/preparation.aspx
Norman, D. A. (1984). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.),
Mental models (pp. 7–14). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London: The
Nuffield Foundation.
Rennie, L. J. (2007). Learning science outside of school. In S. K. Abell (Ed.), Handbook of research
on science education (pp. 125–170). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rennie, L. J., Feher, E., Dierking, L. D., & Falk, J. H. (2003). Toward an agenda for advancing
research on science learning in out-of-school settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
40(2), 112–120.
Sfard, A., & Prusak, A. (2005). Telling identities: In search of an analytical tool for investigating
learning as a culturally shaped activity. Educational Researcher, 34(4), 12–22.
Shepardson, D. P., Wee, B., Priddy, M., & Harbor, J. (2007). Students’ mental models of the
environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 327–348.
Spencer, B. H., Cox-Petersen, A. M., & Crawford, T. (2005). Assessing the impact of service
learning on preservice teachers in an after-school program. Teacher Education Quarterly, 32(4),
119–135.
Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching
science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 45–93).
New York: Macmillan.
Vermunt, J. D., & Verloop, L. (1999). Congruence and friction between teaching and learning.
Learning and Instruction, 9(3), 257–280.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change
in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535–585.
White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. New York: Falmer.
Windschitl, M. (1999). The challenges of sustaining a constructivist classroom culture. Phi Delta
Kappan, 80(10), 751–755.
Zeichner, K. M., & Tabachnick, B. R. (1981). Are the effects of university teacher education
‘washed out’ by school experience? Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 7–11.
Downloaded By: [University of Maryland College Park] At: 15:36 13 September 2010