Research Article

Consistency between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers

Volume: 7 Number: 2 April 15, 2018
EN

Consistency between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers

Abstract

This study aims to explain the extent to which prospective physics teachers’ views and practices are consistent with the constructivist framework. A case study design was employed as the research approach. The study was conducted with 11 prospective physics teachers attending a state university in Turkey. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews, observation notes and lesson plans. The interview guide consisted of questions which allowed the interviewer to probe participants’ views of constructivism based on 5E learning model. Such questions as “how do you plan your teaching?” (introducing new topics, continuing the lecture, types of questions to ask, evaluating students’ understanding etc.) were included in the interview. Following the analysis of the interview data, participants’ profiles were classified into three categories: traditional, transition and constructivist under the dimensions “beginning of a lesson,” “learning process,” “learning environment” and “assessment.” Observations were carried out using an observation checklist consisting of 24 items based on 5E learning model. Another checklist developed by the researchers was used to evaluate participants’ teaching qualifications. Interview results showed that seven participants had transitional, three had constructivist and one had traditional views. However, none of the participants were observed to exhibit constructivist teaching styles. Moreover, observation and interview results were consistent only for six participants, indicating that almost half of the participants had difficulty putting their views into practice.

Keywords

References

  1. Aguirre, J. M., Haggerty, S. M., & Linder, C. J. (1990). Student‐teachers’ conceptions of science, teaching and learning: A case study in preservice science education. International Journal of Science Education, 12(4), 381–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069900120405
  2. Appleton, K., & Asoko, H. (1996). A case study of a teacher’s progress toward using a constructivist view of learning to inform teaching in elementary science. Science Education, 80(2), 165–180.
  3. Ates, O., & Eryilmaz, A. (2011). Effectiveness of hands-on and minds-on activities on students’ achievement and attitudes towards physics. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 1–22.
  4. Bassey, M. (1999). Case study research in educational settings (doing qualitative research in educational settings) (1st ed.). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
  5. Boulton-Lewis, G. M., Smith, D. J. H., McCrindle, A. R., Burnett, P. C., & Campbell, K. J. (2001). Secondary teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning. Learning and Instruction, 11(1), 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00014-1
  6. Boz, Y., & Uzuntiryaki, E. (2006). Turkish prospective chemistry teachers’ beliefs about chemistry teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1647–1667. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500439132
  7. Brickhouse, N. (1990). Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41, 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248719004100307
  8. Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Studies on Education

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

April 15, 2018

Submission Date

February 15, 2018

Acceptance Date

March 29, 2018

Published in Issue

Year 2018 Volume: 7 Number: 2

APA
Ates, O., Unal Coban, G., & Kaya Sengoren, S. (2018). Consistency between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(2), 359-372. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.7.2.359
AMA
1.Ates O, Unal Coban G, Kaya Sengoren S. Consistency between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers. eujer. 2018;7(2):359-372. doi:10.12973/eu-jer.7.2.359
Chicago
Ates, Ozlem, Gul Unal Coban, and Serap Kaya Sengoren. 2018. “Consistency Between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers”. European Journal of Educational Research 7 (2): 359-72. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.7.2.359.
EndNote
Ates O, Unal Coban G, Kaya Sengoren S (April 1, 2018) Consistency between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers. European Journal of Educational Research 7 2 359–372.
IEEE
[1]O. Ates, G. Unal Coban, and S. Kaya Sengoren, “Consistency between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers”, eujer, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 359–372, Apr. 2018, doi: 10.12973/eu-jer.7.2.359.
ISNAD
Ates, Ozlem - Unal Coban, Gul - Kaya Sengoren, Serap. “Consistency Between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers”. European Journal of Educational Research 7/2 (April 1, 2018): 359-372. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.7.2.359.
JAMA
1.Ates O, Unal Coban G, Kaya Sengoren S. Consistency between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers. eujer. 2018;7:359–372.
MLA
Ates, Ozlem, et al. “Consistency Between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers”. European Journal of Educational Research, vol. 7, no. 2, Apr. 2018, pp. 359-72, doi:10.12973/eu-jer.7.2.359.
Vancouver
1.Ozlem Ates, Gul Unal Coban, Serap Kaya Sengoren. Consistency between Constructivist Profiles and Instructional Practices of Prospective Physics Teachers. eujer. 2018 Apr. 1;7(2):359-72. doi:10.12973/eu-jer.7.2.359