A Redesigned Geocience Content Course's Impact on Science Teaching Self-Efficacy Beliefs

Jun 20, 03:49 AM

Current Headlines: By Posnanski, Tracy J

ABSTRACT Many future elementary science teachers have never been exposed to constructivist-based science instruction as recommended by national and state science standards. A constructivist-based course format asserts that the construction of knowledge arises from interactions among students, activities that link prior conceptions to new experiences, and hands-on and investigative learning activities. This study indicates that a science content course for preservice teachers can be designed and implemented with constructivist teaching practices. When education majors have experiences with inquiry-based instructional methods in a content- based course, their preparation as future teachers of science is benefited. The constructivist framework of the course appeared to have an impact on the future teachers' beliefs about their ability to teach science effectively. The key findings of the study indicate that the modeling of effective instruction, exposure to science standards, overviews of the nature of science, and practical experiences with school-based curricular activities serve to improve the educational experiences and self-efficacy beliefs of the preservice teachers.

INTRODUCTION

A National Science Foundation report called for university science faculty to provide education majors (preservice teachers) opportunities to learn science facts, methods, processes and actions of scientists (NSF, 1996). There are concerns that most universities involved with teacher education are not meeting the needs outlined by the NSF. University science faculty may view teacher education as the domain of schools or colleges of education and may put little effort in designing science courses with appropriate content and methodology for prospective teachers (McDermott, 1990). Science faculty can nave an impact on science education reform by providing the experiences for education students in which they develop a positive disposition toward science, an understanding of the processes of science, and an appreciation for the role of the scientists in their training to be teachers (Watters and Ginns, 2000). In higher education, "professors need to model exemplary science pedagogy and science curriculum practices. Teachers need to be taught science in college in the same way in which they will teach science in school" (NRC, 1996, p. 238). Thus, "changing the pedagogical practices of higher education is a necessary condition for changing pedagogical practices in schools" (NRC, 1996, p. 226).

However, reform efforts at the university level that call merely for adding more content to a preservice teachers' science coursework or program is not enough. It is the link between content and pedagogy that impacts the development of future science teachers (Mcloughlin and Dana, 1999). "Few teachers, particularly those at the elementary level, experience any (college) teaching that stresses the skills of inquiry and investigation; they simply never experience those methods..." (Cole et. al., 2001, p. 5). Most preservice teachers are limited to experiencing the didactic teaching approach (lecture, reading and testing) used in most undergraduate science classrooms (Fones et. al, 1999). This didactic approach may also contribute to the general tendency for elementary education majors to dislike science and to lack enthusiasm for teaching it; as a result they do not teach science very often or very effectively (Gosselin and Macklem-Hurst, 2002).

When preservice elementary teachers are poorly prepared to teach science or have had few science-related experiences in their teaching preparation programs, they tend to have anxiety about teaching and learning science (Czerniak and Haney, 1998). This anxiety may be in addition to poor attitudes and beliefs about science and their own capacity to teach science effectively (Walters and Ginns, 2000). The beliefs preservice teachers hold about their ability to teach science effectively are known as self-efficacy beliefs. Self-efficacy beliefs are linked to attitudes, anxiety levels, and motivation to carry out certain actions and are thought to be a mediating factor that can influence a teachers potential as an instructor (Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy beliefs can be modified through experiences preservice teachers have during their undergraduate program. Modifications can occur when they have opportunities to successfully experience science activities, see the modeling of effective science teaching and learning strategies, and receive positive verbal persuasion (Morrell and Carroll, 2003). This paper summarizes the efforts of a geoscientist, a science teacher from the local public school district, and the author to modify the design and delivery of an introductory geoscience course for elementary education majors. The intention of the paper is to also discuss the resultant impact of the course on developing the preservice teachers' self-efficacy beliefs.

BACKGROUND

Building preservice elementary teachers' effectiveness as science educators may be accomplished by courses other than science teaching methods courses (Waiters and Ginns, 2000). Science teaching effectiveness can be bestowed through experiences in science content courses when instructional methods and curriculum materials are altered for preservice teachers (Stevens and Wenner, 1996). Science content courses which are "specialized" for preservice teachers (with a focus on an appropriate amount of content, the infusion of educationalpedagogy and an emphasis on inquiry) may have a positive impact on student pedagogical and science content knowledge (Mcloughlin ana Dana, 1999). A traditional science content course which is restructured to focus on inquiry-based instructional strategies (i.e., experiencing the methods of scientific inquiry while learning new science content) could modify preservice teachers' self-efficacy beliefs and raise confidence to teach science (Friedrichsen, 2001).

It has been reported that a growing number of geoscience educators have been active in utilizing instruction aligned with constructivist, inquiry-based and student-centered approaches with some success (e.g. see Harris, 2002). Inquiry-based and student- centered activities are related to a constructivist approach where students build their own knowledge to increase their depth of understanding (Brooks and Brooks, 1993). Geoscience courses that embrace constructivist pedagogy can impact the attitudes of preservice teachers toward learning geoscience content and build their confidence in teaching geoscience in the future (Slater et. al., 1999; Fones et. al, 1999; Brown et. al., 2001). Constructivist based geoscience courses allow for deeper student understanding of the content and the adoption of discovery orientated approaches to teaching (Kiggs and Kimbrough, 2002).

In this study, to determine any impact of newly designed constructivist-based course haa on preservice teachers, this course was compared to a more traditional introductory Geoscience course. There were many logistical similarities between the two courses involved in this study. Each was offered for identical credit and followed the same configuration of lecture (three hours per week) and a laboratory section (two hours per week) immediately following lecture during a 16 week semester. Each course included field trips during a blocked lecture/lab section and each instructor had a graduate student serving as a teaching assistant. The courses covered the same geologic concepts and content (as typical in introductory geoscience courses - major features of the earth's surface, earth materials, natural changes on the earth's surface, the formation of rocks and minerals, earth systems, weather and climate, the solar system, and human interaction with the earth) and used similar textbooks and laboratory manuals.

The courses differed in pedagogies. The constructivist-based course was designed on a format that acknowledges that the construction of knowledge occurs in conjunction with interaction among students, with activities that link prior conceptions to new experiences and with hands-on and investigative learning activities (e.g., see Brown et. al., 2001). The traditional course was not designed to adhere to these constructivist principles. The course description and delivery of information in the traditional course might be characterized as a more passive learning format that tends to emphasize the transmission of facts and verification laboratory experiences. The format of the traditional course might be considered typical of most undergraduate introductory geoscience course (as described in Gosselin and Macklem-Hurst, 2001; Libarkin and Anderson, 2005).

A focus of the newly designed course included developing views of the nature of science along with constructivist pedagogy. It also involved strategies to build self-efficacy beliefs. For example, the innovative course was designed to include nature-of-science aspects (Akerson et. al., 2000), reform/constructivist teaching (Wainwright et. al, 2004), and the means to mediate self-efficacy beliefs [i.e., modeling, vicarious experiences, and a positive emotional tone (Bandura 1997)]. The focus of the course included instruction/ curricula explicitly focusing on the history, philosophy and societal finks of science to promote more appropriate views of science. These views included how science concepts are used on a daily basis, that everyone can learn science, that science changes over time, and that science involves technology. To help promote these views, the instructor also related the real-world uses of the geoscience topics under study, including research experiences and activities to help contextualize and convey the information. Another focus of the course was to promote constructivist based instruction, inquiry-oriented and laboratory-centered activities, and content knowledge acquisition (Brooks and Brooks, 1993). The goal of the course was to convey content that was relevant for the students' future teaching of science rather than content geared for students who major in the science. Students were exposed to the national, state, and local earth science content standards that helped to frame the content information requirements embedded within the local public school district's science program. Inquiry-based instructional strategies were also employed as students performed geoscience activities in small groups and laboratory experiments, during lectures, and on field trips.

ASSESSMENT

This study sought to determine the effectiveness of science content courses in altering the science teaching self-efficacy beliefs of preservice education students. The central research question was whether modifications promoted by a research-based call for skills of inquiry and investigation (via a constructivist approach) in a content-based science course were effective in the alteration of preservice science teacher self-efficacy beliefs. Tertiary research questions included whether changes in self- efficacy beliefs were related to the more innovative and standards- based delivery of both science content and pedagogical content knowledge embedded within the design of the new course.

The methodology used to determine the effectiveness of the constructivist-based course on altering the self-efficacy beliefs of preservice teachers was based on a pre/post-test research design using descriptive statistics. A control group, used for comparison purposes, consisted of 19 preservice teachers who took the traditional introductory course. These 19 students were unable to take the new introductory course as it had an enrollment cap of 50 students. The experimental group consisted of 30 of the 50 students enrolled in the constructivist-based class (e.g., 30 students completed all measures pre and post-test).

A survey on science teaching self-efficacy beliefs for preservice teachers was administered pre-/post-test to the preservice teachers in both courses. The Science Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Instrument for preservice teachers (STEBI-B, Enochs and Riggs, 1991) was used to determine changes in student self-efficacy beliefs. The STEBI-B consists of 23 likert-scaled items (strongly agree to strongly disagree) and responses totaled over the 23 items provide a valid and reliable measure of self-efficacy beliefs (Bleicher, 2004).

Descriptive statistics were also used to determine if changes in self-efficacy beliefs might be related to the delivery of the innovative course or to another factor such as content knowledge acquisition ~ a factor which may also impact the development of self- efficacy beliefs (e.g. see Wenner, 1995 and Tosun, 2000). A five question content test was also administered pre/post test to both groups of students to determine if content knowledge acquisition may have differentiated the groups. The test questions were based on the Praxis II Middle School Study Guide (ETS, 2004). The Praxis II is the state content-based exam required for elementary teacher licensure. Typically the preservice teachers must pass the exam before being allowed to complete their program, and the test questions were reflective of the general earth science content knowledge required for their licensure. Five earth science questions were pulled from the study guide and used based on their alignment to topics covered in the geoscience courses (i.e., characteristics of space, model of solar system, rock formation processes, continental drift, and science-technology-society/ environmental resources).

Table 1. Mean scores for STBBI-B1 PSTE and STOE.

Table 2. Mean scores for five question content test.

In addition to the quantitative data gleaned from the pre-/post- survey and test, qualitative data was collected and quantified via a teacher observation protocol. The Teacher Observation Protocol (O- TOP, Wainwright et. al. 2003) was used - two lectures and one laboratory class were randomly observed from each course - to identify the frequency of instructional strategies used by the instructors. Both the STEBI-B and O-TOP instruments have been reported as valid and reliable measures (Enochs and Riggs, 1991; Wainwright et. al. 2003).

Patterns and trends from the data analysis were identified and triangulated to determine possible themes that emerged from the data. The analysis involved the reduction of data to isolate themes that emerged through the identification of patterns or trends in the data (Patton, 2002). These themes and patterns were used to triangulate - support or refute - information gleaned about self- efficacy reliefs. Each form of data analysis was built upon the other. For example, it was determined whether the courses had differing effects on preservice science teaching self-efficacy beliefs. Next, the learning experiences of the preservice teachers in the courses were codified. These learning experiences were then linked to course activities that connected constructivism and the aforementioned aspects of nature of science to activities that may have had a role in altering self-efficacy beliefs.

RESULTS

The STEBI-B instrument consists of two subscales. Each subscale measures two independent factors related to teaching efficacy. The first factor is Personal Science Teaching Efficacy (PSTE) and the other factor is Science Teaching Outcome Expectancy (STOE). PSTE is a belief in the ability to execute a course of action. STOE is the belief that executing the course of action will then impact student learning.

The t-test revealed the initial pre-test PSTE and STOE scores for both groups of students were similar. The 2.96 point difference in initial mean scores (constructivist-based course = 48.80, traditional course = 45.84) between the groups was found not to be statistically significant. This may indicate students were comparable in efficacy beliefs at the start both courses. The post- test PSTE and STOE scores increased (constructivist-based course = 52.87, traditional course = 47.63) for both groups; however, only the change in PSTE post-test scores for the constructivist-based course was statistically significant (p<.05) over time (see Table I). Using Conen's d effect size based on the difference in means (d = .26), the effect size was found to be in the medium range (Cohen, 1977). This might indicate that there was a difference in PSTE scores pre- to post-test for the students in the innovative course that could be attributed to the instructional treatment the students received within the course. A pair-wise comparison indicated the post-test difference in PSTE means (5.24) between groups was statistically significant (p<.05) as well. The Cohen's d effect size based on the difference in means between groups (d = .31) was found to be in the medium range (Cohen, 1977). This might indicate that the difference in final scores between the groups could be attributed to an intervention such as the variation in course design.

Results from the five-question content test indicate that both groups had similar pre-test scores and changes in post-test scores. A t-test revealed that both groups demonstrated similar initial (constructiyist-based course = 2.74, traditional course = 2.86) and final scores (3.47, and 3.38 respectively). Both groups showed an increase in scores and the results were statistically significant (p<.05) (Table 2). This might indicate that both courses covered similar content information, and all students gained some knowledge of common earth science concepts.

The O-TOP generated a profile of instruction through the measure of 10 items linked to reform-based, constructivist teaching. (The development of the items are described in detail in Wainwright, et. al., 2004). The numerical values of the items were treated as categorical. The confirmation of certain teaching strategies was accomplished by rating teaching behaviors in categories and then noting the frequency of those behaviors on the O-TOP. The frequency of behaviors was collapsed into three categories (not observed, infrequent, and frequent) to provide ease in examining the data (as suggested by Wainwright, et. al., 2004).

Results from O-TOP indicated that both groups of students had some degree of exposure to each of the ten reform-based, constructivist components identified by the observation items. This exposure occurred in either or both the lecture and laboratory sessions, with higher scores occurring in the laboratory section for both groups. However, students in the newly designed course had slightly greater frequencies of exposure to some components of constructivism during the lecture portion of the course. The innovative course had more frequent opportunities for students to use various modes of investigation during activities to answer open- ended questions, develop working relationships, and converse with each other and the instructor. The constructivistbased course also had more instances of the instructor probing with scaffolding questions students' existing knowledge, preconceptions, and conceptual thinking. Also evident in the constructivist-based class were more opportunities for students to generate alternative strategies and various interpretations of evidence. Interdisciplinary and real world connections were more often made with the content/concepts under study in the constructivist-based course that in the traditional course. The instructor of the constructivist-based course also modeled the forms of effective science teaching by using multiple representations of content and concepts and by varying instructional pedagogy. (Table 3 lists the frequencies gleaned from the O-TOP survey). Table 3. Frequencies of O-TEP items observed in 185 and 100 courses. * C=Constructivist- based Course, T=Traditional Course

DISCUSSION

Although there may be limitations to the research design and methodology used in this study (i.e., limited number of classes observed with a tendency to generalize from a few cases and a lack of confirmatory interviews with course instructors regarding the interpretation of observations), the results generated by this study triangulate and indicated the underlying assumptions that guided this research might have been supported. For example, the analysis of the STEBI-B data indicates that participation in the constructivist-based course might have had a positive impact on the self-efficacy beliefs of the preservice teachers. Both groups ofpreservice teachers in this study had similar initial PSTE scores indicating the two groups might have consisted of comparable students. The STEBI-B analysis also yields information that the outcome expectancies of the preservice teachers enrolled in either course did not change. The former results were expected based on the design of the innovative course, and the latter results were expected based on prior research on outcome expectancy. The course was designed to include instructional strategies aligned with constructivist pedagogy and contained activities commensurate with building self-efficacy beliefs through the emphasis on the nature of science as outlined earlier in this paper.

Outcome expectancy is difficult to measure in preservice teachers for a number of reasons (Bleicher, 2004). First, at this stage in their professional development, the preservice teachers might have found it more difficult to accurately predict student outcomes when they did not have experiences in transferring their beliefs via instruction in the classroom. (The preservice teachers had not yet had field or student teaching experience.) This is different from predicting more clearly their own abilities to teach based on beliefs about themselves. second, the influence of other external factors involved in student outcome expectancy (i.e., background knowledge, mandated curricular emphasis, availability of other educational resources, etc...) might have blurred the distinction between outcomes based on teacher performance and those based on locus-of-control factors (Tschannen-Moran, et. al., 1998). Thus, some preservice teachers' responses the STOE subscale items might be uncertain. This uncertainty was evident in participant responses from both groups in this study and again it appears both groups were similar in composition and stage of development as teachers.

The content knowledge measured by the five questions from the Praxis H study guide indicated the courses might have had a similar impact on student knowledge acquisitions. This result was expected as both courses covered identical content commensurate with an introductory course in the geosciences. The data analysis indicated that each group started and ended with similar scores and neither group of preservice teachers showed declines in content knowledge. The results might indicate that similar content knowledge was equally acquired by students in both groups regardless of format of the course.

The classroom observations analyzed with O-TOP instrument indicated that the constructivist-based course had greater frequencies of instructional behaviors and strategies that might be considered aligned with inquiry-based learning, constructivist pedagogy, aspects of the nature of science, and information that can impact self-efficacy beliefs. For example, various open-ended questions (oral or written) were often used by the instructor to initiate, probe, and challenge student activities, discussions, and conclusions. In addition, students were consistently observed working in teams or groups (beyond the laboratory activities as noted in both courses) during the lecture portion of the course. The instructor of the traditional course did not appear to engage student conversation or conduct discussions during the lecture portion of the course. Questions were rarely asked to the class and the answers to questions that were asked appeared convergent in nature. The instructor did not appear to model inquiry-based teaching strategies or provide students with opportunities to conduct activities linked with lecture topics.

CONCLUSION

The group of preservice teachers in the newly designed course demonstrated changes in self-efficacy beliefs compared to their colleagues enrolled in the more traditional introductory geoscience course. The fact that students in both groups appeared to have gleaned similar levels of content knowledge within each course might indicate that difference in the development of self-efficacy beliefs between the groups was not based solely on content knowledge acquisition. Therefore, another factor such as the instructional format of the course might be responsible for the differences in self-efficacy beliefs. Classroom observations supported the differentiation between the courses in terms of instructional practices. The new course differed from the traditional course in its use of constructivist instructional approaches that were aligned with strategies to develop the students' self-efficacy beliefs. The new course included overviews of science standards, discussions of effective science teaching pedagogy, explicit nature-of-science connections, practice with curricular activities from the local school district's science program, and the modeling of constructivist-based teaching approaches that included scaffolded questions, group work, and hands-on activities during course sessions.

Self-efficacy beliefs, as previously reported, can mediate preservice teachers' anxiety, motivation, and desire to teach science based on perceptions of their ability to teach effectively. Typically, the self-efficacy beliefs of preservice teachers are developed mostly through the science teaching methods courses that are taken within their education program (Morrell and Carroll, 2003). The results of this study indicate self-efficacy beliefs could also be altered by participation in a content-based science course designed for preservice teachers. When preservice teachers receive numerous opportunities to address their beliefs about their ability to teach science, they continue to develop a positive disposition toward science and may eventually teach science more effectively (Watters and Ginns, 2000).

The results of this study also support the previously reported benefits of specialized content-based courses for preservice teachers. Although some researchers (e.g. Libarkin and Anderson, 2005) denote that neither traditional or alternative approaches to undergraduate geoscience instruction may oe adequate for engendering conceptual change, changes in instructional approaches such as those described in this paper are still warranted. When the undergraduate students are preservice teachers, using alternative approaches to the teaching of content might demonstrate how content could be effectively delivered aside from lecture or confirmatory laboratory experiences. Adding provisions for pedagogy, practice and modeling of effective instruction, the course goes beyond simple content delivery and becomes a viable alternative for preservice teachers when traditional science content courses may not meet their needs.

However, adding a constructivist approach and the accompanying instructional strategies tnat also serve to build the self-efficacy beliefs may not be easily accomplished. The building of self- efficacy beliefs with preservice teachers requires consistency in the instructional strategies used in science teaching methods courses and science content courses (Morrell and Carroll, 2003). Thus, collaboration among schools, colleges, and departments that offer such courses is paramount. Proper planning and the time and flexibility required for designing, implementing, and evaluating such changes to traditional course formats is required for a smooth transition in practice (Riggs and Fambrough, 2002). A constructivist focus requires that a variety of instructional practices be used, prior student knowledge be recognized, and equal levels of student experiences with science not be assumed (Brown, et. al., 2001). Moving toward a more student-centered course design requires on- going efforts, flexibility, and the willingness of the instructor to "give up" some authority (Harris, 2002). These issues should not to be considered lightly as they may be key components in successfully reforming science content courses for preservice teachers.

REFERENCES

Akerson, V.L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., and Lederman, N.G., 2000, Influence of a reflective explicit activity-based approach on elementary teachers' conceptions of nature of science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 37, p. 295-317.

Bandura, A., 1997, Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, New York, W. H. Freeman and Company, 613 p.

Bleicher, R., 2004, revisiting the STEBI-B: Measuring self- efficacy in preservice elementary teachers, School Science and Mathematics, v. 104, p. 361-416.

Brooks, J. C., and Brooks, M. G., 1993, In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms, Alexandria, VA, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 136 p.

Brown, L. M., Kelso, P. R., and Rexroad, C. B., 2001, Introductory geology for elementary education majors utilizing a constructivist approach, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 49, p. 450-453. Cohen, J., 1977, Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, Orlando, FL, Academic Press, 476 p.

Cole, D., Ryan, C., Serve, P. and Tomlin, J., 2001, March, Developing, sustaining and assessing collaborative structures with education, science, mathematics and English, American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, Dallas, TX.

Czerniak, C., and Haney, J., 1998, The effect of collaborative concept mapping on elementary preservice teachers' anxiety, efficacy and achievement in physical science, Journal or Science Teacher Education, v. 9, p. 303-320.

Educational Testing Service, 2004, Praxis series study guide middle school test, Princeton, N.J., Educational Testing Service, 326 p.

Enochs, L., and Riggs, I., 1990, Further development of an elementary science teaching belief instrument: A preservice elementary scale, School Science and Mathematics, v. 90, p. 694- 706.

Fones, S., Wagner, J., and Cladwell, E., 1999, Promoting attitude adjustments in science for preservice elementary teachers, Journal of College Science Teaching, v. 28, p. 231-236.

Friedrichsen, P., 2001, A biology course for prospective elementary teachers, The American Biology Teacher, v. 63, p. 562- 568.

Gosselin, D., and Macklem-Hurst, J., 2002, Pre-/post-knowledge assessment of an earth science course for elementary/middle school education majors, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 50, p. 169- 175.

Harris, M., 2002, Developing geoscience student-learning centered courses, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 50, p. 515-523.

Libarkin, J., and Anderson, S., 2005, Assessments of learning in entry-level geoscience courses: Results from the geoscience concept inventory, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 53, p. 394-401.

McDermott, L. C., 1990, A perspective on teacher preparation in physics and other sciences: The need for special science courses for teachers, American Journal of Physics, v. 58, p. 734-742.

McLouglin, A. S., and Dana, T. M., 1999, Making science relevant: The experiences of prospective elementary school teachers in an innovative science content course, Journal of Science Teacher Education, v. 10, p. 69-91.

Meichtry, Y. J., 1998, Elementary science methods: Developing and measuring student views about the nature of science, in McComas R., H., ed., The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic, p. 231-241.

Morrell, P., and Carroll, }., 2003, An extended examination of preservice elementary teachers' science teaching self-efficacy, School Science and Mathematics, v. 103, p. 246-252.

National Research Council, 1996, National science education standards, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 262 p.

National Science Foundation, 1996, Shaping the future: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering and technology, Washington D.C., National Academy Press.

Patton, M. Q., 2002, Qualitative research and evaluation methods, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage publications.

Riggs, E. M. and Kimbrough, D. L., 2002, Implementation of constructivist pedagogy in a geoscience course designed fro preservice K-6 teachers: Progress, pitfalls, and lessons learned, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 50, p. 49-55.

Slater, T. F., Safko, J. L, and Carpenter, J. R., 1999, Long term attitude sustainability from a constructivist-based astronomy-for- teachers course, Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 47, p. 366- 368.

Stevens, C., and Wenner, G., 1996, Elementary preservice teachers' knowledge and beliefs regarding science and mathematics, School Science and Mathematics, v. 96, p. 2-9.

Tosun, T., 2000, The impact of prior science course experience and achievement on the science teaching self-efficacy of preservice elementary teachers, Journal of Elementary Science Education, v. 12, p. 21-31.

Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A., and Hoy, W., 1998, Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure, Review of Educational Research, v. 68, p. 202-248.

Wainwright, C., Morell, P., Flick, L, and Schepige, A., 2004, Observation of reform teaching in undergraduate mathematics and science courses, School Science and Mathematics, v. 104, p. 322- 335.

Watters, J., and Ginns, S., 2000, Developing motivation to teach elementary science: Effect or collaborative and authentic learning practices in preservice education, Journal of Science Teacher Education, v. 11, p. 301-321.

Wenner, G., 1995, Science knowledge and efficacy beliefs among preservice elementary teachers: A follow-up study, Journal of Science Education and Technology, v. 4, p. 307-315.

Tracy J. Posnanski Department of Curriculum and Instruction, School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, PO Box 413, Milwaukee Wl 53201-0413, tjp@uwm.edu

Copyright National Association of Geoscience Teachers Mar 2007

(c) 2007 Journal of Geoscience Education. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.