Journal of the Korean earth science society (한국지구과학회지)

The Korean Earth Science Society (한국지구과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Exploring Secondary Science Teacher Preparation Program and Suggesting its Development Direction: A Case of USA and Korea

  • Park, Young-Shin (Department of Earth Science Education, Chosun University) ;
  • Lee, Ki-Young (Science Education Division, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Morrell, Patricia D. (School of Education, University of Portland) ;
  • Schepige, Adele (School of Education, Western Oregon University)
  • Received : 2017.08.07
  • Accepted : 2017.09.26
  • Published : 2017.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Teacher quality is a topic of international concern, as it impacts student learning and teacher preparation. This study compared the undergraduate secondary science teacher preparation programs from two universities in Korea with those of Oregon, USA. We examined the programs' structural curricular coherence, conceptual curricular coherence, and curricular balance. Structural curricular coherence was determined by examining the overarching goals of the institutions' programs, the organization of the programs of study in terms of meeting those goals, and outside bodies of evidence. All universities were in structural coherence for various reasons. Conceptual curricular coherence was determined by examining students' perceptions of the connection between their preparation and their clinical practice. In case of Korea, most students from both universities were not satisfied with their practical preparation. In the US, the students from both institutions felt well prepared to transition to inservice teaching. To determine curricular balance, we examined the institutions' preparation programs looking at the credit hours taken in the four main areas of the teacher knowledge base: GPK (General Pedagogical Knowledge), SMK (Subject Matter Knowledge), PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge), and CK (Contextual Knowledge). The total credit hours taken in each category was very similar by country but the application and field component in the USA was far greater than those of Korea where the focus was heavily on SMK and PCK. The main reason for these may be the nations' licensing and employment processes.

Keywords

References

  1. Abell, S.K., 2006, Challenges and opportunities for field experiences in elementary science teacher preparation. In K. Appleton (Ed.), Elementary science teacher education: International perspectives on contemporary issues and practices (pp. 73-90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum in association with the Association for Science Teacher Education.
  2. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 2013, NCTQ review of nation's education schools deceives, misinforms public. Retrieved from http://aacte.org/newsroom/press-releases/nctq-review-of-nations-educationschools-deceives-misinforms-public.html
  3. Borko, H. and Mayfield, V., 1995, The roles of the cooperating teacher and university supervisor in learning to teach. Teaching & Teacher Education, 11(5), 501-518. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(95)00008-8
  4. Cannon, J.R. and Scharmann, L.C, 1996, Influence of a cooperative early field experience on preservice elementary teachers' science self-efficacy. Science Teacher Education, 80(4), 419-436.
  5. Carlsen, W.S., 1999, Domains of teacher knowledge. In: Gess-Newsome, J. and N. G. Lederman, (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge. The construct and its implications for science education. (pp 133-146). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  6. Danielson, C., 2002, Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
  7. Darling-Hammond, L., 2000, Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000
  8. David, F., LeeAnn, M., Joseph, K., & Brian, R., 2015, Assessing the Role of Curriculum Coherence in Student Learning About Energy. Journal of research in science teaching, 52(10), 1408-1425. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21261
  9. Feiman-Nemser, S., 1990, Teacher preparation: Structural and conceptual analysis. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman, & J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 212-233). New York, NY: Macmillan.
  10. Feiman-Nemser, S., 2001, From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013-1055. https://doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00141
  11. Gess-Newsome, J., 1999, Pedagogical content knowledge: An introduction and orientation. In Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman. (Eds). Examining pedagogical content knowledge. The construct and its implications for science education. (pp. 3-20). The Netherlands Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  12. Greenberg, J., McKee, A., and Walsh, K., 2013, NCTQ teacher prep review executive summary. Retrieved from http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/Teacher_Prep_Review_executive_summary
  13. Grossman, P.L., 1990, The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York. NY: Teachers College Press.
  14. Hammerness, K., 2006, From coherence in theory to coherence in practice. Teachers College Record, 108(7), 1241-1265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00692.x
  15. Ingersoll, R., 2007, A comparative study of teacher preparation and qualifications in six nations; Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Retrieved from http://www.cpre.org/sites/default/files/researchreport/823_sixnationsfinal.pdf
  16. Jeong, J.S., Park, J., Park. J., Kim, Y., and Park, Y.S., 2014, Developing and applying in-service program for spreading the Practical On-site Cooperation Model (POCoM). Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(3), 257-268.
  17. Jose, M., 2003, The structural coherence of students' conceptions in mechanics and conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 25(5), 539-561. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210163242
  18. Kwak, Y., 2002, Impacts and tasks of teacher education programs revealed by preservice teachers: students' intact belief. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 23(4), 309-324.
  19. Kwak, Y., 2009, The professional development of beginning secondary science teachers. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 30(3), 354-365. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2009.30.3.354
  20. Lee, K., 2009, An analysis of earth science teachers' topicspecific pedagogical content knowledge: A case of preservice and in-service teachers. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 30(3), 330-343. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2009.30.3.330
  21. Lee, K., 2013, An analysis of the association between subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge for science teachers: The case of earth science teachers' lesson on atmospheric pressure. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(6), 1219-1236. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.6.1219
  22. Lee, K., Maeng, S., Park, Y.S., Lee, J.A., and Oh, H., 2014, A case study of middle school science teachers' topic-specific pedagogical content knowledge on the unit of stars and universe. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(4), 393-406. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.4.0393
  23. Loveless, T., 2013, The 2013 Brown Center report on American education: How well are American students learning? Brown Center on Education Policy at Brookings, 3(2), 1-36.
  24. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J. and Borko, H., 1999, Nature, sources, and development of PCK. In Gess-Newsome J. & Lederman N. G.(Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge. The construct and its implications for science education. (pp 95-132). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  25. Micha, H., Marcel, J., Hans, De., & Kerst, Th, 2015, Promoting Conceptual Coherence Within Context-Based Biology Education, Science Education, 99(5), 958-985. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21179
  26. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future., 1996, What matters most: Teaching for America's future. New York, NY:
  27. Author, 2013, Unit standards. Retrieved from http://www.ncate.org/Standards/UnitStandards/UnitStandardsinEffect2008/tabid/476/Default.aspx
  28. National Math+Science Initiative. (n.d.). The STEM Crisis. Retrieved from www.nms.org/Education/TheSTEMCrisis.aspx
  29. Otsuji, H., Oh, P., Lin, C., Mui, W.S., and Lu, Y.L., 2016, Primary school science teacher training in East-Asia: In the continuous reforming for the quality assurance. In Lin, H-S., Gilber, J.K., & Lien, C-J (Eds.), Science education research and practices in East Asia. (pp 245-272).Taiwan: Higher Education Publishing Co. Ltd.
  30. Park, Y.S., 2008, Preserive teachers' beliefs about teaching and learning science through field experience. Journal of the Society of the International Gifted in Science, 2(1), 53-69.
  31. Park, Y.S., 2010, Secondary beginning teachers' view of scientific inquiry: With the view of Hands-on, Mindson, and Hearts-on. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 31(7), 798-812. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2010.31.7.798
  32. Park, Y.S., 2014, Innovation in science teacher education in South Korea. In Yin, C-Y & Wang, R-J (Eds.), Advances in research on teaching: Innovations in science teacher education in the Asia Pacific. (pp. 81-104). United Kingdom: Emerald Publishers.
  33. Park, J., Kim, Y., Park, Y.S., Park, J., and Jeong, J.S., 2015, Development and application of the practical onsite cooperation model (POCoM) for improving science teaching in secondary school. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 45-63.
  34. Roehrig. G.H. and Luft, J.A., 2008, Exploring the first year of teaching in secondary science classrooms, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Baltimore, MD.
  35. Shulman, L.S., 1986, Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1175860
  36. Shulman, L.S., 1987, Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
  37. Simmons, P.E., Emory, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., Crockett, D., Richardson, L., Yager, R., Crave, J., Tillotson, J., Brunkhorst, H., Twiest, M., Hossain, K., Gallagher, J., Duggan-Haas, D., Parker, J., Cajas, F., Alashannag, Q., McGlamery, S., Krockover, J., Adams, P., Spector, B., LaPorta, T., James, B., Rearden, K., and Labuda, K., 1999, Beginning teachers: Beliefs and classroom actions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 930-954. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199910)36:8<930::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-N
  38. Tairab, H., 2008, A study of science teachers' perceptions of their educational preparation. Journal of Faculty of Education, 25, 1-24.
  39. Tatto, M., 1996, Examining values and beliefs about teaching diverse students: Understanding the challenges for teacher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18, 155-180. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737018002155
  40. Wang, L., Cheung, D., Chiu, M.H., Ogawa, M., and Park, Y.S., 2016, Preservice education of high school science teachers. In Lin, H-S., Gilber, J.K., & Lien, C-J (Eds.), Science education research and practices in East Asia. (pp. 273-302). Taiwan: Higher Education Publishing Co. Ltd.
  41. Wenglinsky, H., 2000, How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. (A Policy Information Center Report). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
  42. Wright, A.P., Horn, S.P., and Sanders, W.L., 1997, Teacher and classroom context effects on student achievement: Implications for teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11, 57-67. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007999204543
  43. Yoon, H.G., Kim, M., Kim. B.S., Joung, Y.J., and Park, Y.S., 2013, Preservice teachers' view of inquiry teaching and their responses to teacher educators' feedback on teaching practice, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics. Science & Technology Education, 9(4), 273-286.