elements for a typology of teachers' conceptions of physics teaching

Teaching & Teacher Education, Vol. 8, No. 516, pp. 497-507, 1992 Printed in Great Brttatn

0742-051X/92 $5.00+0.00 Pergamon Press Ltd

ELEMENTS FOR A TYPOLOGY OF TEACHERS’ CONCEPTIONS OF PHYSICS TEACHING

ANA MARIA FREIRE and MARIA DE FATIMA CHORAO C. SANCHES

University of Lisbon, Portugal

Abstract-While searching for characteristics that could be considered as constituents of pedagogical functional paradigms, the purpose of the study was to identify the secondary school teachers’ conceptions of teaching physics. In addition, an attempt was made to reach a higher level of synthesis in terms of a typology of physics teaching conceptions. Seventeen subjects were selected according to the following characteristics: (a) type of pedagogical and scientific education, (b) professional experience, and (c) age. In order to identify possible patterns regarding the subjects’ pedagogical reasoning, a set of lesson descriptions referring to a variety of electricity lessons based on different curricular orientations was used. The analysis of the subjects’ pedagogical arguments permitted the delimitation of types of science teaching conceptions labeled as the traditional, the experimental, the constructivist, the pragmatic, and the social. The study implications regard (a) a further understanding of the nature and factors impinging on the science teachers’ pedagogical thinking and acting, and (b) a search for new directions in conceptualizing a teachers education to be conducive to their conceptual and professional development.

Teachers’ thinking research has expanded in directions encompassing domains as diverse as mental processes involved in teaching, subject- matter knowledge, the nature of the context that affects teachers’ theories and practices, and methodologies which crucially have departed from behaviouristic approaches. Clark and Peterson’s (1986) review of the cognitive process research has identified four main areas: planning instruction, teachers’ interactive thoughts and decision-making, theories of practice, and beliefs. A more recent review (Kagan, 1990) reasserts the richness that the field has developed since Panel 6 of the National Institute of Education launched the study of teacher cognition in 1975. Yet, the analysis of the approaches to the assessment of teacher cognition also raises questions derived from using different and sometimes contradictory epistemological avenues.

Among the interrelated branches of teachers cognition, curriculum research has recently emerged from new paths and consequently gained new identity. Present change in curriculum research, as Calderhead (1987) suggests, is

probably better understood in the light of the curriculum development organizations’ failure to have an impact on teaching practices. This view becomes particularly sharp when innova- tions or global curricular reforms are to be implemented. Research in this area indicates that teachers’ beliefs, thoughts, judgements, knowledge, and decisions affect how teachers perceive and think about both the training they receive and the new curricula. Furthermore, the extent to which teachers implement the curricula as intended by the developers appears to be associated to these components of teacher cognition. The practical relevance of these findings is two- fold. On the one hand, they suggest changes in the approaches to teacher education. On the other hand, they appeal for a radical departure concerning traditional methods of school curricula reform. Indeed, both aspects imply and implicate viewing the teachers as professionals.

The importance of understanding the relationship between how teachers think and what they do is apparent in Hart and Robottom’s (1990) study. In this regard, a gap would exist between

491

498 ANA MARIA FREIRE and MARIA DE FATIMA CHORAO C. SANCHES

teachers expectations for their students and their actual teaching practices, the implication being that the process employed in science education reform must account for the theoryypractice gap. Hart and Robottom further argue that this perceived gap does not originate in a teacher deficit. Rather, such a deficit would be a function of conventional approaches to educational reform which have ignored teachers’ beliefs and personal knowledge, and denied the existence of teachers’ theories of action (Sanders & McCutcheon, 1986). A similar view stems from Huberman’s (1973, 1986) research. Indeed, changing pedagogical practices will be a success- ful endeavour only if it is conceptualized and planned according to an understanding of both the teachers’ conceptions and the practices that have a true value for them.

Building on Kuhn’s (1970) conceptualization of paradigm change and on Cracker’s (1983), Cracker and Banfield’s (1986), and Lantz and Kass’ (1987) research, the present study purported to identify the characteristics of the physics teacher’s functional paradigms. Whether considering organizational structure and change (Imershein, 1977), teacher’s interpretation of curricular innovation, or the determination of specific factors and strategies for originating paradigm shifts that may alter teacher practices (Cracker, 1983; Lantz & Kass, 1987), a functional paradigm reports itself to what is shared, valued, and transmitted to new generations of teachers. In a sense, one may consider that the functional paradigm constitutes a domain of interaction between two dimensions of teaching: a nomothetic dimension including what is legis- lated through educational policies and other official mandates, and an idiographic dimension encompassing teacher’s views about education, theoretical and practical conceptions about instruction, school organization, and the role of teacher in school and society. The nature of that possible interaction would determine the proxi- mal contextual conditions under which either a culture of resistance to change ~ which a functional paradigm implies ~ or a culture of innovation might be developed.

The complexity of factors underlying each of the two dimensions is enormous. This study was restricted to identifying the secondary school teachers’ conceptions about the teaching of physics, and examining the teaching commonplaces

described by Schwab (1978) in order to determine where the locus of dominances and commonalities, if any, lay.

Hewson and Hewson (1988) suggest that an appropriate conception of science teaching must include the following components: teaching and learning, content, learners and their knowledge. In the present study, conception of teaching was defined as a set of ideas, beliefs, understandings, and interpretations of pedagogical practices concerning the nature and content of physics, the pupils and the way they learn, the teachers and the role they play in the classroom, and the context in which pedagogical practices occur. These include curricular decisions (the nature and form of the content) and instructional decisions (how the content relates to the learners in the instructional setting).

Conducted in the present context of science curricula reform in Portugal, the present study specifically purported to describe and explore:

1. The nature of the practical arguments used by the secondary school physics and chemistry teachers while analyzing class situations designed to reflect a variety of curricular perspectives.

2. Possible types of teaching conceptions regarding physics.

Study Design

Subjects

Seventeen secondary school physics and chemistry teachers in 11 public schools located in Lisbon volunteered to participate in the study. Subjects were selected according to a large range of teaching experience. The mean age was 37.1. The subjects’ mean years of teaching experience was 10.4. Four subjects were student teachers in their practicum year. One subject had 1 year of teaching experience. Two of them were cooperat- ing teachers with 30 years of teaching experience. Three subjects were pre-service student teachers in the Department of Education. The teaching experience for the other subjects ranged between 5 and 20 years.

Procedure

Dewey (1963) and Schiin (1983, 1987) have opened the path toward the application of the notion of reflection to the educational realm. Since then, reflection has been used in domains

Teachers’ Conceptions of Physics Teaching 499

relative to the nature and goals of teacher education, interaction between theory and practice, and research on teachers’ thinking. As a research methodology, reflection would permit the expression, clarification, and interpretation of both actions and meanings attributed to professional practices (Van Manen, 1977). Re- flection appears then as a fundamental process to capture and illuminate pedagogical practices from “inside” (Garman, 1986).

The method used in the present study differs from Schon’s in that reflection “in action” was not used. It draws on Fenstermacher’s (1986) view of practical judgement, and conjugates “pre-hoc” beliefs and conceptions about teaching with “post-hoc” evaluations of pedagogical practices. In order to initiate the process of reflection, the subjects were presented with a set of eight vignettes describing a variety of plans for physics lessons which were designed to represent different kinds of instruction and reflect a variety of curriculum theoretical perspectives. The subjects were then asked to think aloud on those pedagogical situations attributed to other teachers’ practices.

The structure of each vignette was based on the “interview about events”, a technique developed by Osborne and Gilbert (1980). It has been used to explore the concept a person associates with a particular label (e.g., plant, force, etc.). More specifically, the instrument describes a diversity of possible lessons about electricity for eighth graders. The instrument explicitly provides instances of science teaching and a practical, experience-based context for the subjects’ reflection.

The focus of analysis was directed to physics teaching. Subjects were asked to read and then reflect on the content of each vignette. There were neither prescriptions regarding what might be considered to be important, nor a priori selection of which aspects should be given a particular focus. The interview format allowed the respondents to reflect on their ideas as well as to review earlier statements in view of the logic of their arguments. This procedure was based on the assumption that each lesson plan would put in use the appropriate set of schemata guiding the subjects’ reflection. Developed through and along the subjects’ professional experience, cognitive schemata would constitute a frame of reference for the subjects to analyze

and interpret each specific pedagogical situation. The interview addressed the following ques-

tions: 1. Would you think the lesson plan described

in this class plan would be appropriate for a first class on electrical current for eighth graders? Why or why not?

2. How frequently do you happen to plan a lesson like this? Why or why not?

3. Is the teacher teaching physics in this lesson description? Why or why not?

The interview content was tape recorded and transcribed verbatim. Then data was submitted to content analysis. Frequencies were computed for the answers to the first part of each question for all vignettes. The analysis started with the reading of the transcripts several times while keeping in mind four general criteria extracted from Schwab’s (1978) “commonplaces of teaching”: the student, the role of the teacher, the discipline ~ physics ~ , and the context of teaching. This heuristic conceptualization in- cludes sets of categories which correspond to characterizations of components relative to conceptions of science. teaching. The arguments raised by the 17 subjects during the reflection process were coded, analyzed, and given a structure within the categories that were identified.

In the process of categorization, a constant comparison method (Strauss, 1987) was used from data to the criteria and characterizations and from these to data again. This part of the analysis, toward a greater generality and abstrac- tion, built the background from which new categorizations were obtained. This last analytic phase traced the basis for generating types of conceptions of physics teaching.

Conceptual Framework and Description of the Physics Lessons

Eight lesson descriptions were developed in order to represent the following theoretical curriculum orientations: (1) constructivism through a student’s alternative conceptions approach; (2) discovery learning and inquiry; (3) science/technology/society; (4) experimental demonstration; (5) physics application to daily situations; and (6) historical perspective of physics. A brief description of these conceptual perspectives for teaching science follows.


1. Student’s Alternative Conceptions (Class Plan A)

The lesson description in class plan A was based on the constructivism premise that children develop their own personal theories on the world and on natural phenomena (Osborne & Freyberg, 1985; Driver & Erickson, 1983; Gilbert & Watts, 1983). Empirical studies (Tiber- ghien & Delacote, 1976) have indicated that children’s preconceptions about scientific concepts, originating through social interaction, appear to be resistant to change. Moreover, they develop in ways that are not predictable and desirable from the school perspective (Driver & Oldham, 1986; Hashweh, 1986). In this sense, planning learning activities that aim at helping students to differentiate between “daily knowledge” and “symbolic knowledge” (Solomon, 1983,1985) became an imperative goal for science teaching. From this perspective, curricula in general and the teaching of physics should both be designed to facilitate the students’ conceptual change (Tobin, Deacon, & Fraser, 1989).

2. Science/Technology/Society (Class Plans B and F)

These two lesson descriptions were based on curriculum development which focuses on societal and community issues and problems. They were designed to reflect the social recon- structionism theory which dates back to Dewey’s (1963) conceptualization. Recent science curricular projects in the U.K. and U.S.A. were developed according to a teaching perspective which stresses the educational value of analyzing the social implications of science and technology. Hurd (1986) and Solomon (1988) suggest the relevance of the curricular component on a double account: Its motivational power and the understanding of problems that are typical of the most advanced societies. Indeed, it was suggested that the debate on scientific and technological issues would contribute to the students’ personal social development and educate them for citizenship.

In class plan B, energy resources was the issue to be addressed by the students while working in small groups; in class plan F, the lesson was set for debating social implications of scientific

and technological progress. The focus was on the construction of a nuclear plant, in the mar- gins of Tagus, a river near Lisbon.

3. Scientijk Inquiry (Class Plans C and G)

Class plan C included the description of a lesson characterized by a discovery learning approach according to Bruner’s (1960) theor- ization. Class plan G was based on a scientific inquiry orientation through the use of a black box. The students’ autonomy and direct experience in the learning process were given relevance as factors for motivation and understanding the nature of science as a building process.

Emphasis on the process of science as a principle for curriculum organization dates from the 1950s and it has been justified on the following bases: (a) the contemporary knowledge explosion in constant and rapid evolution makes it less relevant to center science teaching on contents that tend to become obsolete; (b) stress- ing facts and the products of science would lead students to develop a reductionist image of science; moreover, a content-based curriculum was viewed as less motivating and stimulating of the students’ interest in science. In this sense, it became more important that the pupils develop scientific attitudes. Indeed there is empirical evidence (Lijnse, 1983; Hodson, 1988) that the students’ development of a scientific oriented mentality, and positive attitudes toward science are associated with both the teachers’ teaching style and the image of science they portray in the classroom.

4. Experimental Demonstration (Class Plan D)

This class plan proposed a science teaching approach which put in evidence the didactic method of instruction even when it focuses on scientific processes. The teacher was the center, either questioning the students or conducting experimental activities. Students were assumed to be listening, answering the teacher, and taking notes. In regard to physics teaching, scientific facts were presented as truth, as knowledge that the student must assimilate in order to acquire a “solid formation” and pursue advanced studies in the discipline.


5. Practical Applications of Physics in Daily Life (Class Plan H)

Class plan H included two parts. In the first, the teacher used a video showing electrical sets which the students were likely to use in their daily life. The purpose of using this video was to make students aware of the practical implications and applications of physics. In the second part of the lesson, the teacher opened a space and time for analyzing issues and answering questions which might be raised by the students. Despite the climate of dialogue, the students were assigned the role of spectators either in watching the videogram or answering the teacher when they selected to do so. Indeed, video and teacher are the predominant conveyors of information.

6. Historical Perspective of Physics (Class Plan E)

This class plan was developed to portray science as an activity that expresses human creations across time and civilizations. The Pro- ject Physics, developed in the U.S.A. in the 1960s constitutes an example of science teaching from a historical and humanistic perspective. The advantage of such an orientation, as Bouwer and Singh (1983) advocate, lies with making the students understand how relevant the science role has been in societal development.

Subjacent to this orientation was the goal of teaching students to become acquainted with the history of physics and, through it, emphasizing its problematic nature. In addition, the historical and cultural context of scientific discoveries and progress were highlighted.

In this lesson description, the teacher presented a historical document reporting bio- graphical data on Galvani and Volta. The students’ attentions were called to the famous debate between these two scientists in order to stress both the socio-cultural dimension of the context and the complex dynamics implicated in their scientific knowledge construction. Students did more in this class than reading and inter- preting the document; hands-on tasks was the next phase of the learning process. Students

worked in small groups and shared their thinking and conclusions. The teacher’s role was limited to assisting students only if they asked for help.

Curricular Emphases in Teaching Physics

The purpose of this study was to identify the teachers’ conceptions of teaching physics in secondary school, while searching for features that could be considered as constituents of both pedagogical functional paradigms and a typology of science teaching conceptions. Grounded in the main schools of thought in curricular development, a set of eight class plans containing lesson descriptions was presented as external objects of reflection, as means for the subjects to project their own personal pedagogical conceptions. In searching for higher levels of intelligi- bility, the richness of argumentation revealed in the interview protocols was systematically submitted to a process of identifying both commonalities and distinctivenesses. Analysis of the commonalities justified the characterization of a physics teaching functional paradigm. The determination of curricular emphases led to the delimitation of types of conceptions labeled as the traditional, the experimental, the pragmatist, the constructivist, and the social. Figure 1 illus- trates this part of the results.

Results are presented in a two-part analysis. First, quantitative data are presented in Table 1. The analysis refers to the argument’s nature; its categorization and definition of types of teaching conceptions compose part two of this section.

As Table 1 shows, the historical perspective (E) and the daily practical application of physics (H) constituted the predominant class approaches to the teaching of electrical current. Yet, a large number of subjects reported that they had never planned classes under these two curricular orientations at that point in time. On the other hand, while the historical approach and its viability in teaching physics did not raise large differences among the subjects, their agreement was lower for the daily application approach.

It should be noted that the subjects’ lowest level of agreement fell on lesson descriptions B,


Table 1

Frequencies Relative to the Introductory Questions for All Class Plan (N= 17)

Class plan

Questions 1. Would you think that this lesson plan could constitute a first lesson to electrical current?

It Yes No depends

2. Do you happen to plan a 3. Is the teacher in this lesson like this? lesson plan

teaching physics?

Many It times Sometimes Never Yes No depends

8 0 9 1 4 12 11 3 5 11 1 2 5 10 8 7 9 5 3 2 3 12 12 3 8 9 0 6 11 0 12 2

11 4 2 3 7 7 13 0 6 I 4 1 8 8 10 4 9 6 2 0 5 12 13 2

11 5 1 0 4 13 8 6

F, and H as approaches to teaching physics. Most subjects considered that in these type of classes the teacher was not teaching physics. Similarly for the Student’s Alternative Concep- tions (A), Science/Technology/Society (B), Scien- tific Inquiry (C and G) and Practical Applica- tions of Physics in Daily Life (H) were not considered by the subjects as their usual ways of teaching. In contrast, Experimental Demon- stration (D) and Historical Perspective of Physics (E) appeared to correspond to the most frequent practices. However, some subjects reported that they had never used historical references in their classes.

On the other hand, all teachers had already planned classes like the one described in class plan Experimental Demonstration (D). Most of the subjects considered that class plans C and G could constitute physics teaching. However, only few of them planned and taught according to these approaches. The argumentation subjacent to these subjects’ answers is presented in the following section.

The Nature of the Arguments Pertaining to Inquiry as a Science Teaching Conception

Two distinct orientations were identified regarding teaching physics as inquiry. While some subjects appeared to view science teaching as a substantive domain to be taught, others empha-

sized the syntactic structure of science (Schwab, 1978). The first group of subjects focused on the substantive content, giving priority to facts, laws, and principles. The second gave preference to the main view of science as a process of inquiry. The conception was also revealed in the differential subjects’ position regarding the pedagogical use of experimental work as a pedagogical device centered in the teachers demonstration versus hands on activities as a method centered in the students active participation. In this sense, teaching science as a process was used by some subjects as a minimizing, traditional approach while others revealed a dominant experimentalist orientation. Emphasis on the first approach justified the label of traditional type. Emphasis on students’ inquiry activities as teaching the means by which new knowledge is developed and scientific progress is pursued justified the label of experimenta type. ore specific characteristics follow below.

Experimental Demonstration

Arguments regarding the pupils.

~ Giving incentive to pupils’ motivation. - Developing the pupils’ reasoning skills

through experimental demonstration as much as through “hands-on” activities per- formed in small groups.


Substantive

structure Syntactic Structure Conceptual Change Social Context

phasis on Science Legacy

Emphasis on Science COllSUUCtlOll

Emphasis on Students’ Scmce Pre-conceptIons

Emphasis on Science Dally Apphcat~ow

Emphasn on Socxml Implicauons of Science

radnional Experimentalist Constmctivist Pragmatist Social

Figure 1. Teachers’ conceptions of teaching physics.

- Congregating of all pupils’ attention in the same activity. It is necessary that the pupils observe the same thing while the teacher conducts the experimental task.

- Observing something concrete instead of looking at the pictures in the textbook.

- Memorizing and understanding while observing the teacher performing experimental demonstration, listening to the teacher, and taking notes.

~ Raising questions while the teachers conduct the experimental demonstration.

Arguments regarding the teacher role:

- Presenting the great science matters to pupils. - Structuring the pupils’ minds. ~ Helping the pupils thinking and observing. ~ Structuring the pupils’ questions. ~ Structuring the subject matter.

Hands-On Activities

~ Experimental tasks make the students learn what real science is.

- Introducing new/other scientific concepts. - Giving structure to subject matter. - Associating scientific subject matter with

daily events.

The Nature of Argumentation Pertaining to Teaching Physics as a Social Conception

A second teachers’ conception of physics teaching referred to the dominance of a social concern in their practices. In this regard, two emphases were also identified: a holistic view exemplified in the argument of a subject while saying that “Physics is everything around us”; and a parcel view which was more centered on the limits imposed by the official program. The subjects that shared the first position revealed a main concern with the social development of students. This goal for teaching physics lead them to admit that scientific matters could become societal issues. On the other hand, the second group of subjects expressed a concern with a more focused view on the practical issues of science, on the practical applications of science, and on the students’ work preparation as adults.

These two distinct understandings of physics teaching constituted the basis for labeling the first as a social type and the second as a pragmatic type. The arguments for both conceptions follow.

A Holistic View of Physics

~ Leading the pupils to understanding that the school is not apart from the community where they live.


- Calling the pupils’ attention to societal problems, in general and specifically to those stemming from scientific progress.

~ Developing the pupils’ awareness regarding social implications of science.

- Developing the pupils’ critical thinking through the analysis of societal issues.

~ Raising the pupils’ awareness regarding the contribution of science to the betterment of the quality of life.

~ Understanding, transforming, and adapting the program of physics in order to place it into a societal perspective.

A Pragmatic View of Physics Teaching

~ Using daily life issues as a motivational strategy rather than as topics to be dealt with in a scientific manner.

~ Widening up the pupils’ understanding regarding external problems to the school; aiming at their civic development.

~ Selecting practical and daily life issues that are considered to be relevant to prepare pupils for their future life and work.

The Nature of Argumentation Pertaining to Teaching Physics as a Conceptual Change

Conception

Two different positions were found regarding this approach. On the one hand, as Table 1 indicates, few subjects referred to plan lessons according to this orientation. On the other hand, the analysis of the arguments and descriptions of their practices both indicate different interpretations of this approach. Both groups of subjects were dominated by a concern with students’ motivation and learning. However, only one of the subjects appeared to be fully using this approach in her classes.

As an Optimization Approach

Using the students’ alternative science conception approach to teaching signified for a subject to conduct the class in two phases. The preliminary phase was characterized by the following process : --- Leading the pupils to talk about everything

they have inside their heads.

- Giving pupils time to express clearly what they have in their minds.

- Registering everything the pupils say and think about the topic.

--- Asking the essential questions.

The second phase was viewed as an experimental and reflection phase defined in terms of the following operations: ~ Opening a period for inquiry and testing the

pupils’ preconceptions. - Confronting the pupils’ preconceptions with

the results of their investigation. ~ Clarifying the students’ misrepresentations.

As a Minimizing Approach

For most subjects, using students’ views of science appeared under a more reductionist approach, in the sense that it exclusively aimed at motivating students in the beginning of the lesson unit. For them, this approach presented the following features: ~ Starting instruction with the pupils’ ideas. ~ Letting the pupils talk about what they

already know. ~ Obtaining a global and a prior evaluation of

the whole class. - Decoding the pupils’ preconceived ideas is

difficult.

Characteristics of the Subjects’ Functional Paradigm

The results indicate the existence of a functional paradigm which appeared to be characterized by the following features:

1. A dominant concern with strategies for motivating students.

2. Meeting the requirements of the national program for the discipline of physics.

3. Searching for an equilibrium among the subject matter components required by the program.

4. Meeting the efficiency criterion: economy of time.

5. Adapting to the available material resources and school organizational structure.

Globally viewed, the findings converge with those reported by other researchers (Wilson, Shulman, & Richert, 1987; Clark & Peterson,


+

FUNCTIONAL PARADIGM

PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

PROGRESSION PARADIGM

SCHOOL ORGANlZATlONAl CONTEXT

SCHOOL TEACHING CULTURE

OPEN PEDAGOGICAL REPERTOIRE

PEDAGOGICAL EXPERIMENTATION

+ +

INNOVATION

Figure 2. Model of dialectical relationships between functional and progression paradigms.

1986) in the sense that the teachers’ teaching conceptions appear to act as factors influencing the transformation of the “formal” curriculum into the “real” curriculum. The teachers involved in this study emerged as active agents in their differential ways of performing such transformation. Indeed there is some evidence suggesting that different types of teaching conceptions may be associated with different teachers’ positions regarding the dialectic interaction between functional and progression paradigms (see Figure 2). This possible relationship, despite its complex nature, warrants further research.

It is important to highlight that the results did not support a linear view of the teacher’s thinking regarding their teaching conceptions of physics. Indeed, the subjects revealed a large complexity of repertoires along a continuum defined by both a narrow versus large range of teaching practices and large versus narrow ways of thinking about teaching.

The fact that most of the subjects, regardless of their personal curricular conceptions, appeared to work in their daily classroom according to a functional paradigm may be explained in terms of their personal and professional experiences. In this regard, the results converge with those found by Lantz and Kass (1987) and Cracker and Banfield (1986) in that despite sharing a concern with student motivation and

meeting the requirements of the program, each teacher’s functional paradigm diversified itself in a “constellation” of pragmatic beliefs concerning routines and pedagogical approaches that worked better in classroom.

The results also indicate that some subjects seemed to be more open to include approaches that they had never experimented with, while others revealed contradictory ways in their changing professional path. A particular case was identified. A subject seemed to have followed a regression path, in the sense that she had moved away from using a larger range of pedagogical options. The benefits of stability appeared to be firmed and established in a practical professional knowledge and wisdom developed through a large experience. She appeared indeed to be concerned with being efficient and adaptive to a personal pragmatical functional paradigm. In contrast, regardless of the years of teaching, other subjects appeared more likely to accept complexity, ambiguity, and non-linearity in their teaching practices. This group seemed to be more open to engage in pedagogical experimentation and diversification of professional practices.

In sum, the results may be considered in the light of four following interactive dimensions:

1. Characteristics that regard the subjects’ personal and professional development.

2. The coexistence and persistency of different


curricular orientations (Roberts, 1982) despite (or because of) changes that have occurred in science curricula for the last few decades.

3. The predominant tendency for physics teaching to occur within a functional paradigm dominated by factors such as motivating students, dealing with the program within the conditions offered by the school context.

4. The generation of a dialectic relationship between the functional paradigm and a progression paradigm.

Figure 2 depicts a model of such interaction. Adaptation, stability, and efficiency are pedagogical features that define the functional paradigm. Pedagogical repertoires that are opened to change and experimentation regarding theory and practical knowledge and conducive to innovation are essential elements of a progression paradigm. The characteristics of school organization, the nature, and diversity of personal and type of professional experiences, as well as the pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, 1986) acquired in pre- or inservice education might be factors mediating the dialectic transition between the two pedagoiical paradigms.

Further Research

Gilbert, J. k., & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconcep- tions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science .!?d&tion, 10, 61-98.

Hart, E. P., & Robottom, I. M. (1990). The science-technology-society movement in science education: A critique of the reform urocess. Journal ofResearch in Science Teachinq,

Bruner, J. S. (1960). 7he process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Calderhead, J. (Ed.). (1987). Introduction. In Exploring teachers’ thinking (pp. l-19) London: Cassell Educational.

Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255-296). New York: Macmillan.

Cracker, R. K. (1983). The functional paradigms of teachers. Canadian Journal of Education, 8, 35G360.

Cracker, R. K., & Banfield, H. (1986). Factors influencing teacher decisions on school, classroom, and curriculum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 3, 805-816.

Dewey, J. (1963). Experience & education. New York: Mac- millan.

Driver, R., & Erickson, G. (1983). Theories-in-action, some theorical and empirical issues in the study of students’ conceptual frameworks in science. Studies in Science Edu- cation, 10, 37-60.

Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.

Feiman-Nemser, S., & Floden, R. E. (1986). The cultures of teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 505-526). New York: Macmillan.

Fenstermacher, G. D. (1986). Philosophy of research on teaching: Three aspects. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 3749). New York: Macmillan.

Garman, N. B. (1986). Reflection, the heart of clinical supervision: A modern rationale for professional practice. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 2, l-24.

The fact that most subjects had found in a 21, 575-58i.

functional paradigm a pragmatic, adaptive pro- Hashweh, M. Z. (1986). Toward an explanation of conceptual

fessional posture may be explained in terms of change. European Journal of Science Education, 8,229-249.

their personal and professional experience. Fur- Hewson, P. W., & Hewson, M. G. (1988). An appropriate

contention of teaching science: A view from studies of

ther research that addresses the identification of the functional paradigm components from the teachers’ cognitive and affective perspectives, and the influence of the dominant school teaching culture (Feiman-Nemser and Floden, 1986) on the nature of their professional course is needed. In addition, case studies would be of interest in order to examine predominances and correspondencies, if any, among school teaching cultures and science teaching conceptions, within functional versus progression paradigms.

scienck learning. Scienie Education, 72, 597-614. Hodson, D. (1988). Toward a philosophically more valid

science curriculum. Science Education, 72, 19-40. Huberman, A. M. (1973). Como se realizam as mudanqas em

educa@o [How do changes in education occur: Contri- butions to the study of immovation]. (trad. bras). SLo Paula: Editora Cultrix.

Huberman, M. (1986). Un nouveau modtle pour le dkvelop- pement profissionnel des enseignants. [A new model for the teachers’ professional development]. Revue Franc&e de Pedagogie, 75, 5-15.

Hurd, P. (1986). Perspectives for the reform of science education. Phi Delta Kappan, 65, 353-358.

Imershein, A. W. (1977). Organizational change as a paradigm shift. 7he Sociological Quarterly, 18, 3343.

Kagan, D. M. (1990). Ways of evaluating teacher cognition: Inferences concerning the goldilocks principle. Review of Educational Research, 60, 419469.

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). 7he structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

References

Bouwer, W., & Singh, A. (1983). The historical approach to science teaching. 7he Physics Teacher, 23, 230-236.


Lantz, O., & Kass, H. (1987). Chemistry teachers’ functional Solomon, J. (1983). Messy, contradictory and obstinately paradigms. Science Education, 71, 117-134. persistent: A study of children’s out-of-school ideas about

Lijnse, P. (1983). Does science education improve the image of science? Science Education, 67, 575-582.

Osborne, R., & Freyberg, P. (Eds.) (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children ‘s science. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann Educational Books.

Osborne, R., & Gilbert, J. K. (1980). A method for inves- tigating concept understanding in science. European Jour- nal of Science Education, 2, 31 l-321.

Roberts, D. A. (1982). Developing the concept of “curriculum emphases” in science education. Science Education, 66, 243-260.

Sanders, D. P., & McCutcheon, G. (1986). The development of practical theories of teaching. Journal ofCurriculum and Supervision, 2, 50-67.

Schon, D. A. (1983). 7he reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the rejlectioe practitioner. San Franscisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schwab, J. J. (1978). Science, curriculum, and liberal education. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press,

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 3336). New York: Macmillan.

energy. School Science ReGew, 65, 225-229. Solomon, J. (1985). Learning and evaluation: A study of

school children’s views on social uses of energy. Social Studies of Science, 15, 3433371.

Solomon, J. (1988). Science technology and society courses: Tools for thinking about social issues. fnternational Jour- nal of Science Education, 10, 379-387.

Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tiberghien, A., & Delacote, G. (1976). Manipulations et representations de circuits tlectriques simples chez les enfants de 7 a 12 ans [Hands on activities and representations of simple electric circuits in children from 7 to 12 years old]. Revue FranGaise de Pedagogie, 4, 32-44.

Tobin, K., Deacon, J., & Fraser, B. J. (1989). An investigation of exemplary physics teaching. 7he Physics Teacher, 27, 144150.

Wilson, S. M., Shulman, L. S., & Richert, A. E. (1987). “150 different ways” of knowing: Representations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking (pp. 104124). London: Cassell Educa- tional.

Van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6, 205-228.

elements for a typology of teachers' conceptions of physics teaching

Documents