Search

Lesson planning is a core part of teachers' professional competence. Written lesson plans play a significant role in science teacher education as a preparation for demonstration lessons during the final teacher certification exam. However, the few existing scoring rubrics on lesson plans are not particularly theoretically sound and are barely tested for the validity of score interpretations. In response to the demand for transparent and applicable criteria, we developed the "rubric to assess science lesson plans" (RALP) to assess science teachers' lesson plan quality. We employed a mixed-methods approach: First, we present multiple sources of validity evidence (based on "test content," "internal structure," "relations to other variables," and "consequences of testing") as mainly quantitative indicators for the quality of the RALP. Based upon that, we applied the RALP to lesson plans written by preservice and trainee science teachers (N = 100) and provided a qualitative analysis of six cases to illustrate common patterns in these lesson plans. Results indicate that teacher educators consider the RALP criteria (N = 24) relevant and objectively applicable. Correlation analyses of the scores and two teacher educators' holistic quality assessment of all lesson plans provide convincing evidence that the RALP can discriminate lesson plan quality levels. Moreover, comparisons between preservice science teachers and trainee science teachers reveal that trainee teachers score significantly higher than preservice teachers, indicating that the RALP is sensitive to differences in teaching and planning experience. The application and in-depth analysis of three criteria of the RALP illustrate these differences in levels of planning quality. We discuss possible applications of the RALP in science teacher education and research in science teaching.

Despite the importance of evolution to understand biology, there is significant evidence that many biology teachers have difficulties to successfully teach this topic. The purpose of this study is to describe procedures by which a paper-and-pencil instrument to assess teachers' pedagogical content knowledge for evolution (PCK[subscript evo]) was developed and validated. The instrument was created to measure the components proposed in the model of Magnusson et al. (1999), except for the orientations. The creation of the questionnaire was carried out through eleven steps: (1) conceptualization, (2-4) creation of items and rubric reviewed by experts (focus on content and construct validity), (5-7) piloting a 32-item questionnaire to 10 biology teachers (focus on face and construct validity and reliability), (8-10) piloting a 16-item questionnaire to 61 biology teachers (focus on discriminant and construct validity and reliability), (11) application of a different instrument (CoRe interview) to four teachers (focus on criterion validity). The final version of the questionnaire (which includes three PCK components) showed in a Rasch analysis for the reliability of the items ([alpha] = 0.90) and persons ([alpha] = 0.81) adequate values. When applying the final version of the questionnaire, there is also evidence of discriminant validity (differences between two groups of teachers with or without professional development in evolution education). The contributions of the PCK[subscript evo] instrument for research topics and evolution teaching are discussed.

While the hypothetico-deductive approach, which includes inductive and deductive reasoning, is largely recognized in scientific reasoning, there is not much focus on abductive reasoning. Abductive reasoning describes the theory-based attempt of explaining a phenomenon by a cause. By integrating abductive reasoning into a framework for modeling competence, we strengthen the idea of modeling being a key practice of science. The framework for modeling competence theoretically describes competence levels structuring the modeling process into model construction and model application. The aim of this theoretical paper is to extend the framework for modeling competence by including abductive reasoning, with impact on the whole modeling process. Abductive reasoning can be understood as knowledge expanding in the process of model construction. In combination with deductive reasoning in model application, such inferences might enrich modeling processes. Abductive reasoning to explain a phenomenon from the best fitting guess is important for model construction and may foster the deduction of hypotheses from the model and further testing them empirically. Recent studies and examples of learners' performance in modeling processes support abductive reasoning being a part of modeling competence within scientific reasoning. The extended framework can be used for teaching and learning to foster scientific reasoning competences within modeling processes.

Scientific reasoning competencies (SRC) are one part of science teachers' professional competencies. This study examines the contribution of three factors to the development of pre-service science teachers' SRC: the "amount of science education classes," the "amount of science classes" and the pre-service science teachers' "age." The factors "amount of science education classes" and "amount of science classes" have been operationalised in terms of ECTS credit points. N = 438 pre-service science teachers from six universities in Germany, Chile and Canada voluntarily and anonymously responded to an established multiple-choice instrument for assessing SRC, which has been developed by the authors and is available in German, Spanish and English. Multiple linear regression analyses show that the included factors explain a proportion of about 9% of the pre-service science teachers' SRC. The factor "amount of science classes" is the only significant predictor and can be seen as an indicator of learning science content knowledge. These findings support the assumption of science content knowledge being a prerequisite for developing pre-service science teachers' SRC.

Scientific reasoning competencies are highlighted in science education policy papers and standard documents in various countries around the world and pre-service science teachers are asked to develop them during teacher training as part of their professional competencies. In order to monitor the development of pre-service science teachers' scientific reasoning competencies during their course of studies and to enable evidence-based improvements of teacher training, instruments for the assessment of scientific reasoning competencies are needed. However, studies propose that the validity of most instruments for assessing scientific reasoning competencies available so far can be questioned. This study presents an English translation of an already developed German multiple-choice instrument to assess pre-service science teachers' scientific reasoning competencies. A sample of N = 105 Australian pre-service science teachers participated in this study by answering the translated instrument. Quantitative (differential item functioning, Mantel-Haenszel statistic) and qualitative (think-aloud protocols) analyses provide validity evidence for the translated instrument. Furthermore, the interpretation of the data as an indicator for the participating Australian pre-service science teachers' scientific reasoning competencies suggests that there is a need for a more explicit emphasis on scientific reasoning in Australian science teacher training.

Scientific reasoning competencies are relevant science competencies and therefore the development of assessment instruments for scientific reasoning competencies has become an integral part of science education research. However, some authors have questioned the validity of the instruments available so far, since their psychometric quality has not been evaluated satisfactorily. In this study, an established German multiple-choice instrument to assess scientific reasoning competencies has been translated into English and Spanish and the translated versions were evaluated based on the "translation," "review," "adjudication," "pretesting" and "documentation" (TRAPD) approach. Based on samples of German (N = 497), Australian (N = 103), and Chilean (N = 135) pre-service science teachers, statistical analyses (e.g. dimensionality and DIF analyses) provide psychometric evidence for test equivalence between the German and the translated versions of the instrument. Known groups comparisons provide evidence for the valid interpretation of the test scores as measures of scientific reasoning competencies. It is discussed that further studies might evaluate additional sources of validity evidence for the translated versions of the instrument, particularly focusing on cultural specificities. Independent of this need for further research, it is suggested that the three versions can be used to assess the scientific reasoning competencies of pre-service science teachers whose first language is English, German, or Spanish.

As part of their professional competencies, science teachers need an elaborate meta-modelling knowledge as well as modelling skills in order to guide and monitor modelling practices of their students. However, qualitative studies about (pre-service) science teachers' modelling practices are rare. This study provides a category system which is suitable to analyse and to describe pre-service science teachers' modelling activities and to infer modelling strategies. The category system was developed based on theoretical considerations and was inductively refined within the methodological frame of qualitative content analysis. For the inductive refinement, modelling practices of pre-service teachers (n = 4) have been video-taped and analysed. In this study, one case was selected to demonstrate the application of the category system to infer modelling strategies. The contribution of this study for science education research and science teacher education is discussed.

Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and content knowledge (CK) are important dimensions of teachers' professional knowledge that are addressed in education programs for science teachers. In this article we present the structure, content, and evaluation of a preservice biology teachers' training program (N=173) to develop an elaborate understanding of models and modeling for scientific inquiry. Teachers need a profound understanding of this content as well as knowledge how to teach their students in this field. This implemented teachers training program uses the case method to foster both: knowledge concerning models and modeling as part of CK (as precondition) and content-related diagnostic and teaching knowledge as part of PCK. The effect of the program on the preservice biology teachers' knowledge in both areas was evaluated with a pre-post-experimental-control group design using open-ended items for the assessment of model competence and semi-open-ended items and test cases, assessing both diagnostic and teaching knowledge. The quantitative analyses of the open-ended items reveal a significant positive development of model competence from pre- to post-assessment. The qualitative analyses of the test case data reveal a positive development of diagnostic and teaching knowledge (PCK) in the experimental group. Thus, these results give some evidence for using the case method in preservice biology teacher training programs.

The process of thinking in and about models as a scientific practice should be integrated into science teaching and learning. Empirical studies show that students see models primarily in their role as media to facilitate content learning while rarely appreciating models as instruments of scientists which allow the deduction and the testing of predictions. In order to foster students' meta-modeling knowledge successfully, specific diagnostic information about students' understanding of models and modeling is needed. The aim of this study is to gather such diagnostic information by investigating students' understanding of the nature and the purpose of models in biology with respect to context- and grade-specific differences. Students' understanding of the nature and the purpose of models was assessed by using forced choice tasks (N[subscript students] = 285). In order to gain qualitative insight into possible reasons for context-specific differences, the students were additionally asked to give reason for their decision in the forced choice tasks by answering open-ended justification tasks. The results indicate that the majority of students in all grades see models as idealized representations of an original which have the purpose to show or to describe this original. Students' levels of understanding of the nature and the purpose of models increase only little across grades. Nevertheless, a grade-specific analysis of the consistency of students' understanding across contexts suggests that the students' understanding becomes more consistent in higher grades. Students' justifications helped to identify model contexts which have a high potential to be fruitful when trying to foster students' understanding of the nature and the purpose of models.

In research on the nature of science, there is a need to investigate the role and status of different scientific knowledge forms. Theories and models are two of the most important knowledge forms within biology and are the focus of this study. During interviews, preservice biology teachers (N = 10) were asked about their understanding of theories and models. They were requested to give reasons why they see theories and models as either tentative or certain constructs. Their conceptions were then compared to philosophers' positions (e.g., Popper, Giere). A category system was developed from the qualitative content analysis of the interviews. These categories include 16 conceptions for theories (n[subscript tentative] = 11; n[subscript certain] = 5) and 18 conceptions for models (n[subscript tentative] = 10; n[subscript certain] = 8). The analysis of the interviews showed that the preservice teachers gave reasons for the tentativeness or certainty of theories and models either due to their understanding of the terms or due to their understanding of the generation or evaluation of theories and models. Therefore, a variety of different terminology, from different sources, should be used in learning-teaching situations. Additionally, an understanding of which processes lead to the generation, evaluation, and refinement or rejection of theories and models should be discussed with preservice teachers. Within philosophy of science, there has been a shift from theories to models. This should be transferred to educational contexts by firstly highlighting the role of models and also their connections to theories.

The development of metaknowledge about models (MKM) and metaknowledge about the modelling process (MKP) are important in pre-service science teachers (PSTs) education. MKM refers to knowledge about the model's entities and its purposes, while MKP refers to knowledge about the components and structure of the modelling process. Assessing MKM and MKP is crucial to foster this knowledge in PSTs' education. However, assessment instruments focus on MKM rather than MKP, and the connection between MKM and MKP had not been examined deeply. This study validates and applies a diagram task for assessing PSTs' MKP. For validation, ten experts were surveyed and think-aloud interviews were conducted with ten PSTs. The findings support valid interpretations of PSTs' MKP based on the diagram task. In the main study, the diagram task was administrated to 63 PSTs, along with an MKM questionnaire. PSTs' MKP ranged from simple conceptions of modelling as a linear process including few components to sophisticated conceptions of modelling as an iterative process including multiple components. Furthermore, it was found that knowledge about using models to predict a phenomenon is an aspect connecting sophisticated MKM and MKP, indicating that this aspect is crucial to foster both, PSTs MKM and MKP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Students' understanding of models in science has been subject to a number of investigations. The instruments the researchers used are suitable for educational research but, due to their complexity, cannot be employed directly by teachers. This article presents forced choice (FC) tasks, which, assembled as a diagnostic instrument, are supposed to measure students' understanding of the nature of models efficiently, while being sensitive enough to detect differences between individuals. In order to evaluate if the diagnostic instrument is suitable for its intended use, we propose an approach that complies with the demand to integrate students' responses to the tasks into the validation process. Evidence for validity was gathered based on relations to other variables and on students' response processes. Students' understanding of the nature of models was assessed using three methods: FC tasks, open-ended tasks and interviews (N = 448). Furthermore, concurrent think-aloud protocols (N = 30) were performed. The results suggest that the method and the age of the students have an effect on their understanding of the nature of models. A good understanding of the FC tasks as well as a convergence in the findings across the three methods was documented for grades eleven and twelve. This indicates that teachers can use the diagnostic instrument for an efficient and, at the same time, valid diagnosis for this group. Finally, the findings of this article may provide a possible explanation for alternative findings from previous studies as a result of specific methods that were used.