Research in Science Education, 1993, 23, 327-336

TEACHER PERCEPTIONS OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT NEEDS AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE K-6 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SYLLABUS

Colin Webb Macquarie University

ABSTRACT

This study examines teacher perceptions regarding professional development practices used in a region of the NSW Department of School Education to support the implementation of the K-6 Science and Technology Syllabus. The findings from a survey of 97 teachers indicate that teachers have a preference for 'traditional' models of in-service which may not bring about significant changes. Teachers also perceive that change is brought about through the influence of external factors such as in-service and resources which are not directly the responsibility of individual teachers. This contrasts with the perception that the inability to change is due to internal personal qualities.

EVALUATIONS OF SCIENCE TEACHING AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Two recent NSW evaluations, Investigating: Science K-6 Evaluation (NSWDoE, t989), and Program Evaluation of Staff Development in NSW Government Schools (NSWDSE, 1990) indicate serious concern for educational organisations which measure the success of curriculum implementation through changes in classroom practice (NSWDoE, 1989, p. 41). Concerns about the ability of schools to plan for the professional development needs of their staff, were identified in Program Evaluation of Staff Development in NSW Government Schools (NSWDSE, 1990). Curriculum implementation imposes substantial demands on educational organisations and at a more personal level, on the classroom behaviour of individual teachers (Renner, 1990). The considerable funds and time "spent on the development of new curricula are largely wasted unless there is equal consideration accorded to their implementation" (Renner, 1990). This wastage would be compounded if funds and time were wasted on ineffective professional development programs.

The Ln-service Teacher Education Project, initiated by the former Commonwealth Schools Commission (cited in Carrick, 1989, p. 195) described in-service programs commonly used in Australia, as having the following features:

one-off conferences which do not have follow through and recall...; topics ... frequently not well connected with the priorities of schools; follow-up support for ideas and practices introduced in programs occurs in only a very small minority of cases; programs rarely address the direct needs and concerns of the participants; the majority of programs involve teachers from many different schools or regions...; ... lack of long term and systematic planning of programs to ensure their effectiveness.

Given that teachers have generally experienced only the model of in-service described by Carrick (1989), questions arise as to whether they are in a position to purchase or plan professional development programs to support the implementation of innovations in science and technology education such as the NSW K-6 Science and Technology Syllabus (K-6 S&T)

328

(Board of Studies, 1991). The study sought to determine teacher perceptions of how their professional development needs in science and technology would be best met.

Teacher Attitudes and Practices in Science Education

Teachers in New South Wales experienced difficulties in implementing the 1980 'Investigating: Science K-6' policy because of a lack of understanding of the inquiry method, absence of core content in the policy and inadequate in-service. Lack of understanding of the processes involved in the inquiry method and poor teacher confidence in managing inquiry classrooms meant that most reverted to didactic methods and largely ignored the 1980 curriculum (NSWDoE, 1989).

Many studies (Sharon, 1987; Joyce, 1980; Bechtelheimer & Tamashiro, 1987; Goodrum, Cousins & Kinnear, 1992) have looked at the effect in-service programs have on teacher attitudes. Rennie, Parker and Hutchinson (1988) and Goodrum et al. (1992)found that Science in-service programs which focussed on teacher attitude, increased confidence and which supported and monitored teachers as they implemented programs in their classrooms, were able to produce changes in the outcomes for both teachers and students. K-6 S&T also introduces several new content strands. Skamp (1991) found that teachers lacked confidence in the new content strands and indicated the need to specifically address these new strands in pre-service and professional development courses.

Professional Development Practices in the Reqion

Braithwaite and Koop (1985) conducted a study in an administrative region within the NSW Department of School Education which appears to have an administrative structure and resource support identical to that which currently exists in the Metropolitan Region in this study. The most common form of staff development in both the Braithwaite and Koop study and this study was the after-school workshop or lecture, on a topic of general interest, held away from school, in a group setting with little accommodation to individual differences or The Metropolitan Region in this study has an in-service program to support the implementation of K-6 S&T, which reflects Carrick's description. According to Ingvarson this practice provides "a few thousand dollars for one-off in-service courses which could only be given to a fraction of the relevant teacher population. This is crazy" (Ingvarson, 1987). Ingvarson describes such.in-service practices as a 'cottage industry' and stresses the need for it to become "a central component of system level planning and coordination of all resources relevant to the support of innovation, school improvement and professional development" (Ingvarson, 1987). Since 1989, the advent of staff development days has involved principals and teachers in developing professional development programs which can be delivered at the school level. It appears that programs developed for these days duplicate the in-service practices described above.

CONDUCT OF THE STUDY

A survey seeking information concerning teachers' beliefs, attitudes and practices in relation to the 1991 K-6 S&T policy was administered to 97 teachers participating in the PRIMESTEP (Primary Science and Technology Education Program) School Based Professional Development Program. In contrast to the usual 'one-off" in-service course, PRIMESTEP is an extended professional development program, developed for the NSW Department of School Education as a joint project by the University of Western Sydney and the Metropolitan West Region specifically to support the implementation of K-6 S&T. Forty PRIMESTEP leaders, four from each of the ten administrative regions were trained to deliver the school based course.

329

Many questions used in the survey were based on those previously asked by Rennie et al. (1988). Others were drawn from an evaluation study carried out by the Department of Education (NSWDoE, 1989). The surveys were handed to all participants who attended the PRIMESTEP School Based Course during Week 9 of Term III, 1992; 97 completed surveys (97.8 %) were returned.

Women appear to be over represented in the sample (87.6%) compared to the gender balance of primary teachers as a whole. This may be because older women are more likely to be 'growth seeking' than their male cohorts (Howser, 1989) and therefore more likely to be represented in a sample drawn from teachers actually participating in an after-school in-service program. Alternatively, male teachers, in contrast to their female cohorts, may feel more confident in the area of science and technology and may feel less inclined to engage in professional development activities in this area. Rennie et al. (1988) found that female teachers tended to be less confident of their own abilities and knowledge in science, particularly in areas related to the physical sciences. This lack of confidence, combined with the growth seeking attitude identified by Howser may account for the over-representation of women in the sample drawn from the PRIMESTEP School Based Course.

A quarter of the teachers surveyed were members of the school executive (Executive Teachers: 10.3%, Assistant Principals: 10.3%, Deputy Principals: 4.1%). The remainder were classroom teachers, not holding executive positions in their schools. Nine (9.3%) held the position of Release from Face-to-face (RFF) Teacher and were teaching science and technology for their full teaching load. The significance of the practice of using RFF teachers to teach science was commented on by the Department of Education in the 1989 evaluation as one which led to many classroom teachers "not having the opportunity to acquire and practise the teaching skills that are essential for proper implementation of the policy". It also made the teaching of science "someone else's responsibility" (NSWDoE, 1989).

Teacher views on professional development pro.qrams.

Teachers were asked an open-ended question, 'What do you believe is the best way to introduce the Science and Technology Syllabus document to teachers?' Eight categories of

TABLE 1 BELIEFS ABOUT THE BEST WAY TO INTRODUCE THE S&T DOCUMENT TO TEACHERS

RESPONSES COUNT a. Responses indicating where and when the course should be

delivered In-service courses Staff development/pupil free days. At school, school based, in staff meetings,

Tota l b. Responses indicating what should he covered in the courses

Through practical activities, demonstrations/workshops. By providing prepared teaching/program units.

c. Other Gradual in-service with follow-up. Sharing ideas, doing it with class, special centres Courses such as PRIMESTEP

T o t a l

T o t a l

25 22 17 64

33 10 43

13 7 1

21

330

responses were identified, falling into two broad groups (Table 1): responses indicating the point of delivery, i.e. where and when the courses should be held, and responses related to the content of the course.

Where the courses shoutd be held

Thirty nine participants (40.2%) responded that the best way to introduce new syllabus documents is to do so at the school, at staff meetings and on staff development days. There is a clear desire to have professional development activities delivered in the work-place context. This confirms the findings of the Program Evaluation of Staff Development in NSW Government Schools which found that; "School Development days were rated by the vast majority of both primary and secondary (teachers) .... as the most important strategy in their staff development program" (NSWDSE, 1990, p. 12).

Course content

The responses indicate that teachers believe that K-6 S&T should be introduced through the use of practical activities involving demonstrations and workshops. These responses suggest that the teachers in the sample are aware of the 'hands-on' nature of the syllabus and some of its implications for the classroom. The responses also suggest however, that teachers may feel that practical activities are all that is needed to teach science and technology in primary schools. In the words of one respondent, "teachers need to be shown 'how to do it' in their classrooms'. Only thirteen (13.4%) participants suggested that the best way to introduce the syllabus was through gradual in-service with follow-up. These responses may reflect a lack of understanding of the needs of teachers when implementing major changes such as those embodied in both the previous science policy and the current syllabus.

Teachers in the sample appear, in the main, to endorse the in-service practices which have predominated within the region, even though they themselves were participating in the fourth week of the PRIMESTEP.School Based Course which is a gradual in-service with follow-up. Not one teacher expressed a desire for courses to contain details of the learning theories behind the new syllabus. Only one participant suggested that courses such as PRIMESTEP were the best way to introduce new syllabus documents. This contrasts with the evaluations from many regions of the PRIMESTEP Course itself which have been overwhelmingly positive.

The delivery of professional development pro.qrams

To determine perceptions regarding the most effective modes for professional development programs to support the implementation of the Science and Technology Syllabus, participants were asked to rate the effectiveness of eight different modes for professional development programs on a five-point Likert scale where 1 = ineffective and 5 = effective. A mode was defined as the method of delivery or the structure of the course as distinct from the content of the course. Sessions at professional development days were ranked highest by the participants (mean, m = 4.0) while an accredited course run through a university was ranked the lowest (m = 2.8). Sessions at staff development days were rated as the second most effective method of supporting syllabus implementation. ANOVA with repeated measures was used to compare the ratings of the different professional development modes.

Table 2 ranks the modes according to the mean ratings on the effectiveness scale. Significant differences were found between the mean ratings of the professional development 'modes' (F between items 10.27; df=7, 504; p< .0001). Follow-up comparisons using the Scheffe test

331

TABLE 2 PAIRWISE COMPARISON OF EFFECTIVENESS RATINGS

Profess- ional

develop- ment da~'s

4

An intensive one day

c o u r s e

An extended program

Modules delivered

bya member of

staff.

Observ- Several An ations of short after accredited programs school course run in other sessions through schools the PDC*

3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.2 3.1

An ;accredited c o u r s e r u n

through a university

2.8

* (PDC) The Professional Development Cenlre

revealed significant pair-w!se differences as shown in Table 2 where any two means not joined by asterisks are significantly different (p<.05).

Accredited courses run through the Professional Development Centre (PDC) or a university are rated as significantly less effective than all of the other types of courses, other than short after-school sessions. Staff development days and intensive one day courses are rated as significantly more effective than accredited courses. One of the reasons why PDC courses and accredited courses at a university rate significantly lower than day courses may be because they take place generally after-school and require a commitment of time by the individual teacher. A question arises as to whether the use of the word 'university' in one of the options may have resulted in a lower ranking by the participants. Does it reflect teachers' perceptions about the perceived ability, or lack of it, of universities to provide effective courses to support the implementation of the Science and Technology Syllabus? The responses may suggest that such courses, or universities, may have an image problem. It may be that this perception exists towards universities as providers of professional development courses for teachers in general and not specifically towards science and technology. Further research is needed to clarify this issue.

Participants' preferences for professional development on staff development days in response to this question confirm the responses indicated in Table 1 where teachers expressed the desire to have professional development activities organised for them during the day and at the workplace. A question arises as to whether these responses reflect a lack of understanding of the needs of teachers' when undertaking significant changes or innovations? It can be argued that these responses reflect a perception that teachers feel that the Department or the school, as opposed to individual teachers, is responsible for meeting individual teacher needs to implement the K-6 S&T? If this is so, it suggests that teachers perceive that the implementation of the syllabus is largely the responsibility of the 'system' rather than of individuals.

The content of professional development proqrams

Teachers were asked to rank nine different types of professional development courses on the basis of the importance of the content on a five-point scale where 1 = unimportant and 5 = important. The means for each of the nine types of courses are shown in Table 3. Significant differences were found in the ratings of the content of the professional development courses suggested. ANOVA with repeated measures was used to compare the importance ratings of the nine options. Significant differences were found in the importance teachers assigned to the various types of courses. Table 3 ranks the content according to the importance mean derived from teacher rankings of the importance of the different types of

332

courses suggested. Significant differences were found between the ratings of the courses (F between items 58.4; df=9, 688; p< .0001). A follow-up Scheffe test revealed significant pair-wise differences as shown in the table, where any two means not joined by asterisks are significantly different (p<.05).

Participants clearly indicated it was more important for courses to contain a variety of formats (m=4.8), mainly practical activities (m= 4.5), involve opportunities for 'teacher-teacher' interaction (m=4.5), and which involve applying ideas between sessions (m= 4.3) were ranked significantly more important than courses which contained a detailed theoretical base (m=2.5), an awareness of change in adults (m=3.6) and opportunities for guided reflection (m=3.6). The responses to this question reiterate the results in Table 1 where the use of practical activities was considered by almost a third of participants to be the best way to introduce syllabus documents. The significant 'unimportant' rating given to courses which provide a theoretical base further reinforces teacher preference for practical courses. However, the lack of "understanding and translation into teaching practice of the basic philosophy of inquiry and process learning contained in the policy" (NSWDoE, 1989, p. 12) was identified as one of the most significant reasons why the past science policy was not effectively implemented in NSW.

TABLE 3 COMPARISON OF THE IMPORTANCE OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONTENT

Have a Use variety of mainly formats practical

ideas

4.6 4.5

Involve teacher- teacher

nteractio n

4.5

Involve applying

ideas between sessions

4.3

Require Involve Involve Aware- support demon- guided ness of particip- stration reflection change in ation of adults

executive 4.0 4.0 3.6 3.6

Provide detailed theory

2.5

I~ms joined by asterisks (*) indica~ no significant d i f ~ n c e

It is possible to view the nine different types of professional development courses defined in the question as those which require greater involvement of individual teachers and those which are perceived as being the responsibility of the system in the change process. Teachers rate 'internal' aspects of change, such as understandings of the theory behind the syllabus, change in adults and guided reflection as significantly less important than the more 'external' options suggested such as 'practical ideas' and the 'format' of the course. Given the choice, it appears that teachers would prefer practical courses, which reflect 'awareness of change in adults' but are devoid of 'detailed theory', which are delivered on staff development days' at school. While such courses would appear to satisfy teachers immediate needs for 'practical' activities and would allow some immediate application in the classroom, the absence of any theory could jeopardise the long term success of the innovation. It may also suggest the construction of a dependent relationship between classroom teachers and the developers of professional development courses. Courses which provide practical ideas satisfy immediate needs and are regarded as effective and important by teachers, but the absence of theory in such courses creates a dependence on the supply of further practical ideas. The providers of such courses feel that they are satisfying a perceived need and the consumers of the courses perceive that their needs are being met. Such perceptions may be misleading.

333

Re qional In-serv ce proqrams/courses

Almost half of the teachers in the sample had attended regional in-service courses and of these over 65% had attended more than one course. All were in the fourth week of an extended in-service course. Participants were asked to rate the effectiveness of the courses they attended on a five point Likert scale and to provide reasons for their ratings. The mean effectiveness rating appears to be very high (m=4). The responses were grouped into the five categories shown in Table 4. Effective in-service courses were perceived, by 41% of the participants who attended them, to be those which used 'practical activities'. Approximately one third of the participants rated the in-service courses as effective because they were motivating, increased their confidence and enthusiasm for teaching in science and technology. The provision of practical ideas seems to account for their high effectiveness rating.

TABLE 4 REASONS FOR THE RATINGS GIVEN TO IN-SERVICE COURSES

Category They were practical Gave me greater understanding/confidence/motivation Well presented and organised Resources are not available I knew it all already

Number 17 14 7 2 1

Teachers were asked an open-ended question to indicate what they personally believed they needed to implement the Science and Technology Syllabus in their classrooms. The responses were grouped and categorised. These responses indicate that teachers equate needs in relation to syllabus implementation with external factors such as resources, money (presumably to purchase resources and materials) and practical ideas contained in teaching units (see Fig. 1). Interestingly, these responses also suggest that teachers have a particular image of science and technology education, i.e. it involves resources (which presently they don't have), money, takes a lot of time and requires special teaching units. Many teachers may have already identified reasons in their own minds why the science and technology syllabus cannot be implemented in their classrooms.

Other

Present is OK

Enthusiasm/Confidence

Whole School Involvement

Teaching Units

More Time

More Inservice

Resources

Money

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Fi.q. 1. Cate.qoriet of perceived teacher needs to implement K-6 S&T in their classrooms.

334

~ I N T E R N A ~ / . . . . . . S Y S ~ 8 M / 1 0 " ~ I N D [ V I D U A L

{ ~ , ~ , , i . ~ , - . t ! INSERVICE } Enthusiasm I \ . . . . . . . ....... \ / .coo, , .oo /

�9 T ~ d e a s and units ~ . / "A sense of humour /

" ~ ~ e ~hO21vement . ~ . ~ ~ . . . . . . . . . �9 F l e x i b i l i t y ~

Fiq. 2. A model of teachers' perceived needs in relation to implementinq K-6 S&T.

The expressed need for resources, more time, teaching units and for whole school involvement are external factors; perceived as not the responsibility of individual teachers. In-service, which it could be argued is an external factor, but requires the commitment of individual teachers. Relatively few teachers appear to perceive their own role as a critical or important factor in relation to implementing the science and technology syllabus. Only seven teachers mentioned confidence as a need. Very few teachers identify their own personal involvement in the process of change needed to implement the syllabus. The responses suggest many teachers believe that if all the external needs are met; that is, if the resources, time, teaching units and short practical in-service courses are provided, then the syllabus will be implemented. While teachers are individually responsible for attending them, in-service courses provided by the region or the school are perceived as not the responsibility of the individual teacher. In the main, the responses suggest that the responsibility for implementing syllabus documents is not a function of internal changes in individual teachers, but of external changes which are perceived to be responsibility of the school or the system (see Fig. 2).

TEACHER CHANGE

The teachers were asked to indicate what percentage of their colleagues were changing their classroom practices as a result of the science and technology syllabus. The teachers who responded to this question (65) appear to be optimistic about the number of their colleagues who are changing their classroom practices. The mean of the estimates of teachers changing their classroom practices was 58.2%. The range for the sample, from 1% to 100% indicates that there is a big difference between teacher perceptions regarding the number of their colleagues who are changing. Personal characteristics or attributes, as indicated by the data in Table 5) were identified by the teachers in the sample as the reason why some teachers were reluctant to change. Whereas in response to earlier questions, teachers had associated the implementation of the science and technology syllabus with external factors such as resources, time, practical ideas and teaching materials, the inability of others to implement the syllabus was associated with internal or personal attributes such as colleagues being "set in their ways", "unable to cope with the children's freedom", "the mess", "the noise", or because of fear or a lack of confidence. It suggests that the teachers surveyed consider that change occurs because the external factors which they believe facilitate change have been present, but when teachers cannot change its because of internal factors.

335

TABLE 5 TEACHER PERCEPTIONS OF WHY SOME TEACHERS FIND IT DIFFICULT TO CHANGE

ReO~Qn Dislike of mess/noise Set in their ways/routine/style/lazy/resisffattitude RFF Teacher teaches S&T Inability to cope with children's freedom Problems with resources/equipment Lack of skills (group work, knowledge, tools etc) Lack of confidence/fear No response Other(lack of opportunity, takes time, gradual, too much)

Numl~r 19 18 4 3 3 3 2 26 9

IMPLICATIONS

Teachers perceive that their needs in relation to implementing K-6 S&T can be met through the provision of one-day in-service courses held preferably in their respective schools on staff development days. This belief may place unrealistic expectations on the in-service courses and on the teachers participating in them. A perception appears to exist that one-day courses involving practical activities should be able to provide teachers with all they need to implement innovations such as K-6 S&T.

A dependent relationship has developed between those who develop professional development courses and the teachers and schools who 'consume' them. Because the in-service model used in the region invariably focuses on meeting teachers' perceived needs it appears to provide them with what they want without necessarily producing changes in classroom practice. If significant changes in science and technology education are to occur, a better way of determining professional development needs, which integrates the "basic philosophy" (NSWDSE, 1989) and "long term and systematic planning to ensure their effectiveness" (Carrick, 1989).

The expressed belief that external factors will facilitate the implementation of the syllabus can be contrasted with the significant degree of unimportance placed on the development of theory, either relating to the innovation itself or to understanding the change process in adults. Teachers' lack of understanding of the learning theory underlying the current science and technology syllabus, and the lack of understanding of theories of adult change inevitably means that the implementation of K-6 S&T will be compromised.

Investment in syllabus development is an expensive process which is largely wasted if not supported by the use of professional development strategies which will bring about sustained changes in classroom practices. Major system-wide innovations such as K-6 S&T may not be implemented fully and effectively in schools if the same practices which were used to support the implementation of the previous science policy, and which teachers perceive to be appropriate are employed. The beliefs and attitudes revealed in this study raise questions about the way teachers perceive their responsibility in the syllabus implementation process. Teachers and school administrators need to appreciate the theory and philosophy behind the various syllabus documents but this is often overlooked as teachers focus on meeting their immediate needs for practical ideas and resources and seek the most inexpensive way of meeting these needs. Consequently, while teachers' immediate needs may be met, their long term needs are overlooked and perpetuate their dependence on current but discredited in-service practices. The challenge is not so much to develop professional development

336

programs in science and technology, such as the PRIMESTEP Course, which address the perceived needs of teachers, but to have these courses implemented on a system wide basis.

REFERENCES

Bechtelheimer, L., & Tamashiro, R. (1987) Explaining teachers' thinking in computer curriculum courses. Paper presented at the Midwest Education and Technology Conference, St Louis, MO.

Board of Studies (1991). Science and Technoloqy K-6 North Sydney NSW. Braithwaite, J., & Koop, T. (1985). What help do teachers really need? A case study of

curriculum and professional support system. Curriculum Perspectives, 5(2), 59-61. Carrick, J. (Sir) (1989). Report of the Committee of Review of New South Wales schools. New

South Wales Government. Goodrum, D., Cousins, J. & Kinnear, P.J. (1992). The reluctant primary school teacher.

Research in Science Education, 2_.22, 163-169. Howser, M A. (1989). Why some middle aqed teachers fail to learn and .qrow. Oregon School

Study Council, University of Oregon. Ingvarson, L. (1987). Models of in-service education and their implications for professional

development policy. IT A, 1"7(2), 14-19. Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1980). Improving in-service training: The message of the research.

Educational Leadership, 3._77(5), 379-385. NSWDoE [New South Wales Department of Education] (1989). Investiqatinq: Science K-6. An

evaluation of the implementation of the 1980 curriculum policy statement in N.SW schools. Internal Departmental Report.

NSWDSE [New South Wales Department of School Education] (1990). Pro.qram evaluation of staff development in NSW qovernment schools. Internal Departmental Report.

Renner, J. (1990). Planned educational change: Statewide implementation of a New curriculum in Western Australia. Curriculum Perspectives, 10(2), 37-45.

Rennie, L.J., Parker, L.H., Hutchinson, P.E. (1988). The effect of inservice traininq on teacher attitudes and primary school science classroom environments. Measurement and Statistics Laboratory, Research report number 12. Perth WA: Department of Education, University of Western Australia.

Sharon, D. (1987). The Renfrew Quality Education Project: Teachers' views after the first year, Working Papers of the Planning and Development Research Branch, TV Ontario. No, 87-2.

Skamp, K. (1991). Primary Science and Technology. How confident are teachers? Research in Science Education, 2_.!, 290-299.

AUTHOR

COLIN WEBB, Lecturer in Teacher Education, Faculty of Education, Macquarie University, Sydney. Specializations; K-6 teacher education in science and technology education, children's learning in science and technology.