JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Secondary Science Teachers` Concepts of Good Science Teaching
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Secondary Science Teachers` Concepts of Good Science Teaching
Lee, Bongwoo;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate secondary science teacher`s concepts of good science teaching. To do these, I have developed a questionnaire composed of 32 good teachings on education content, instructional method, instructional environment and atmosphere and assessment categories. 136 secondary science teachers have participated in the questionnaire and were requested to show agreement. Additionally, they were requested to describe the best science teachings that they have experienced. Results are as follows: First, the best science teaching that science teachers thought is a teaching that is in full accord with students` level in education content category, a teaching with an energetic interaction in instructional method category, a teaching in a trustful atmosphere in instructional environment and atmosphere category, a teaching in which students could learn something through a teaching-related assessment in assessment category. Second, secondary science teachers thought that a self-directed learning, a differentiated instruction and a teaching with diverse materials are not important factors in good science teaching. Third, there is a difference between good teaching that secondary science teachers have conceived and good teaching that they have experienced. It shows that science teachers did not precisely understand what good science teaching is. Additionally, I discussed the need of finding a case on good science teachings and a support of an interaction-focused teaching.
 Keywords
science teacher;teacher concept;good science teaching;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
1.
교육실습에서 예비과학교사들이 경험하는 딜레마의 유형과 대처 방법,김희경;이봉우;

한국과학교육학회지, 2016. vol.36. 4, pp.657-668 crossref(new window)
 References
1.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural. Science Education, 82, 417-436. crossref(new window)

2.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

3.
Cho, N., Yang, J., You, J., Chuong, M., & Jang, Y. (2001). Improving the Quality of Korean S chool Education - Strategies of Curriculum Management and Classroom Teaching -. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation Research Paper RRC 2001-10.

4.
Cho, K., Kim, D., & Kim, M. (2011). An perspective study on the conditions of good teaching - Based on the 5Good requisites-. The Journal of Elementary Education, 24(4), 325-350.

5.
Clark, C. & Peterson. P. (1986). Teachers' thought process. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching. New York: Macmillan.

6.
Cobb, P., Yackel, E., & Wood, T. (1992). A constructivist alternative to the representational view of mind in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23(1), 2-33. crossref(new window)

7.
Eisner, E. (1983). The art and craft of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40(4), 4-13.

8.
Elbaz, F. (1981). The teachers' "Practical Knowledge": Report of a case study. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(1), 43-71.

9.
Gredler, M. E. (2001). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice-Hall.

10.
Hong, M., Song, H., & Kim, J. (2009). A study on science classroom learning at high school in three countries: Korea, United States and Japan. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation Research Paper RRI 2009-11-1.

11.
Hodson, D. (1982). Is there a scientific method? Education in Chemistry, 19(4), 112-126.

12.
Imm, C., Yi, H., Kwak, Y., Kang, D., Park, Y., & Jung, Y. (2004). A Study on the Development of Teaching Standards - General and Subject-Specific(Social Studies, Science and English) Teaching Standards -. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation Research Paper RRI 2004-5.

13.
Johnson, M. (1989). Embodied knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 19(4), 361-377. crossref(new window)

14.
Kagan, D. (1992). Implications of research on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist, 27, 65-90. crossref(new window)

15.
Kang, D. (2002). Improving the Quality of Korean School Education(II) - A Qualitative Case Study of Good Teaching in the Secondary Social Studies. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation Research Paper RRC 2002-4-4.

16.
Kennedy, M. M. (2010). Against Boldness. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 16-20. crossref(new window)

17.
Kim, J., Choi, S., Kang, D., Kwak, Y., You, J., Yang, J., & Kim, Y. (2003). Improving the Quality of Korean School Education(II)-A Qualitative Case Study for Good Instruction in the Secondary School-. The Journal of Youlin Education, 11(1), 43-61.

18.
Kim, M. (2011). A Critical Examination on the Conditions of Good Instruction: Focused on J. Dewey's Concept of Growth. The Korean Journal of Philosophy of Education, 33(3), 25-47. crossref(new window)

19.
Kim, H., Yoon, H., Lee, K., & Cho, H. (2010). Secondary science teachers' perception of 'Free inquiry' of the 2007 revised science curriculum. Secondary Educational Research, 58(3), 213-235.

20.
Koh, C. (2006). An Ethnographic Study on the Instructional Characteristics Found in Elementary School Teachers "Good" Instruction : Focused on Act, Elicitation, Teaching Behavior Element, and Repair. The Journal of Youlin Education, 14(1), 25-49.

21.
Kwak, Y., & Kim, J. (2003). Qualitative research on common features of best practices in the secondary school science classroom, Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 23(2), 144-154.

22.
Kwon, S. (2010). Teachers' conceptions of good teaching in secondary school: the analysis of importance and performance. Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 185-215.

23.
Lee, K., Jee, K., & Park, J. (2010). nvestigation of elementary school teachers' recognition about open scientific inquiry. Teacher Education Research, 49(1), 71-87. crossref(new window)

24.
Leinhardt, G. & Greeno, J. (1986). The cognitive skill of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 75-95. crossref(new window)

25.
National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C, USA: National Academy Press.

26.
National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C, USA: National Academy Press.

27.
Oh, P. (2013). Secondary science teacher's thoughts on ‘good' science teaching. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(2), 405-424. crossref(new window)

28.
Park, J., & Lee, K. (2011). Actual Conditions of Free Inquiry Implementation and the Perceptions of Teachers and Students in Middle School Science. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 15(3), 603-632.

29.
Seo, K. (2004). The perspectives and conceptions about good instructional practice: An interview study of teachers and students. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22(4), 165-187.

30.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A comtemporary perspective. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp.3-36). NY: Macmillan Publishing.

31.
Sim, J., Shin, M., & Lee, S. (2010). Science Teachers' Perception on Major Features of the 2007 Revised Science Curriculum for Class Implementation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 30(1), 140-156.

32.
Wellington, J. J. (1998). Practical work in science: time for a reappraisal. In J. J. Wellington(Ed.), Practical work in school science (pp. 3-15). NY: Routledge.

33.
Winterbottom, M., Brindley, S., Taber, K., Fisher, L., Finney, J., & Riga, R. (2008). Conceptions of assessment: Trainee teachers' practice and values. The Curriculum Journal, 19(3), 193-213. crossref(new window)

34.
Yi, H., Choi, S., Kim, W., Yun, C., & Jeong, M. (2001). Developing Teaching Materials for Differentiated Instruction in Korean Middle School Classrooms - in the Subject Areas of Korean Language & Mathematics. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation Research Paper RRC 2001-14-1.