Turkish STEM teachers’ opinions about scientist-teacher-student partnership: Research Article

Bulent Cavas; Sedat Capar; Levent Cavas; Omer  Yahsi

doi:10.36681/

Authors

Bulent Cavas Dokuz Eylul University
Sedat Capar
Levent Cavas https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2136-6928
Omer Yahsi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3872-6010

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36681/

Keywords:

Scientist-Teacher-Student Partnership, STEM, Science Education

Abstract

The main aim of this study is to investigate the opinions of Turkish STEM teachers about the Scientist-Teacher-Student Partnership (STSP). In order to provide extra insights about the STSP, a specifically designed questionnaire developed by Malaysian researchers was used. The study consists of data collected from 301 Turkish STEM teachers who have been working in the schools. As a result of the analysis of the data, it was found out that the teachers have positive opinions about the STSP. Looking at the differences between male and female teachers, it was found that there were significant differences in teachers' scores related to the roles of teachers, students, and scientists in the STSP. According to the teachers' experiences of working with scientists or not, the results showed that teachers who do not have experience of working with scientists have a more positive opinion of this collaboration process. Turkish STEM teachers showed greater appreciation of the value of working with a scientist, especially teachers who did not have working experience with a scientist. The outcomes of this study can be used to implement the STSP as a STEM education model.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abrams, E. (1998). Talking and doing science: Important elements in a teaching-for-understanding approach. In J.J. Minstrel, J.S. Wandersee & J.D. Novak (Eds.), Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist Approach. 307-323. Academic Press.

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, C. A. (2007). Likert scales and data analyses. Quality progress, 40(7), 64-65.

Armstrong, R. (1987). The midpoint on a five-point likert-type scale. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 64(2), 359–362.

Anderson, D. & Moeed, A. (2017) Working alongside scientists. Science & Education, 26(3-4), 271–298.

Barab, S. A. & Duffy, T. M. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In Jonassen, D.H. & Land, S.M. (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 25–55). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Barab, S. A. & Hay, K. E. (2001). Doing science at the elbows of experts: Issues related to the science apprenticeship camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 70–102.

Barstow, D., Tinker, R.F., & Doubler, S. (1996). Conference Report, National Conference on Student & Scientist Partnerships, Washington, D.C., TERC and the Concord Consortium.

Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajicik, J. S., , Marx, R. W. & Soloway, E. (1994). A collaborative model for helping middle grade science teachers learn project-based instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 94(5), 483-497.

Bouillion, L. M. & Gomez, L. M. (2001). Connecting school and community with sciencelearning: Real world problems and school–community partnerships as contextual scaffolds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 878–898.

Bolstad, R., & Bull, A. (2013). Strengthening engagements between schools and the science community: Final report. Ministry of Education.

Caton, E., Brewer, C., & Brown, F. (2000). Building teacher-scientist partnerships: Teaching about energy through inquiry. School Science and Mathematics, 100(1), 7-15.

Check J., Schutt, R. K. (2012). Survey research. In: J. Check, R. K. Schutt.(eds). Research methods in education (pp. 159–185). Sage Publications.

Comeaux, P., & Huber, R. (2001). Students as scientists: Using interactive technologies and collaborative inquiry in an environmental science project for teachers and their students. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(4), 235-252.

Donahue, T. P., Lewis, L. B., Price L. F., & Schmidt, D. A. (1998). Bringing science to life through community-based watershed education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7(1), 1523.

Dresner, M. & Starvel E. (2004). Mutual benefits of teacher/scientist partnerships. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 8(3), 1-7.

Dresner, M., & Worsley, E. (2006). Teacher research experiences, partnerships with scientists, and teacher networks sustaining factors from professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(1), 1–14.

Evans, C. A., Abrams, E. D., Rock, B. N., & Spencer, S. L. (2001). Student/scientist partnerships: A teachers' guide to evaluating the critical components. The American Biology Teacher, 63(5), 318-323.

Fadzil, H. M., Saat, R. M., Awang, K., & Adli, D. S. H. (2019). Students' perception of learning STEMrelated subjects through scientist-teacher-student partnership (STSP). Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(4), 537-548.

Finarelli, M. G., (1998). GLOBE: A Worldwide Environmental Science and Education Partnership. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7(1), 77-84.

Flaherty, A. A. (2020). Investigating perceptions of the structure and development of scientific knowledge in the context of a transformed organic chemistry lecture course. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(2), 570-581.

Harlen, W. (2010). Principles and big ideas of science education. Hatfield: Association for Science Education.

Harnik, P. G., & Ross, R. M. (2003). Developing effective K-16 geoscience research partnerships. Journal of Geoscience Education, 51(1), 5-8.

Houseal, A. K, Abd-El-Khalick F., & Destefano, L. (2014). Impact of student- teacher-scientist partnership on students' and teachers' content knowledge, attitudes toward science and pedagogical practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 84-115.

Hugerat, M., Kortam, N., Maroun, N. T., & Basheer, A. (2020). The Educational Effectiveness of Didactical Games in Project-based Science Learning among 5th Grade Students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(10).

Jackson, S. L. (2003). Research methods and statistics, a critical thinking approach. Thomson Wadsworth.

Kelley, T. R., Knowles, J. G., Holland, J. D., & Han, J. (2020). Increasing high school teachers selfefficacy for integrated STEM instruction through a collaborative community of practice. International Journal of STEM Education, 7, 1-13.

Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 313–350.

Ledley, T. S., Haddad, N., Lockwood, J., & Brooks, D. (2003). Developing meaningful student-teacherscientist-partnerships. Journal of Geoscience Education, 51(1), 91-95.

Linn, M. C., Gerard, L., Ryoo, K., McElhaney, K., Liu, O. L., & Rafferty, A. N. (2014). ComputerGuided Inquiry to Improve Science Learning. Science, 344(6180), 155–156.

Mansour, N. (2015). Science Teachers' Views and Stereotypes of Religion, Scientists and Scientific Research: A call for scientist–science teacher partnerships to promote inquiry-based learning. International Journal of Science Education. 37(11), 1767-1794.

Marth, M., & Bogner, F. X. (2017). Does the issue of bionics within a student-centred module generate long-term knowledge. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 55, 117–124.

McGinn, M. K. & Roth, W., M. (1999). Preparing students for competent scientific practice: Implications of recent research in science and technology studies. Educational Researcher, 28(3),14–24.

McLaughlin, C. A., & MacFadden, B. J. (2014). At the elbows of scientists: Shaping science teachers' conceptions and enactment of inquiry-based instruction. Research in Science Education, 44(6), 927–947.

Moss, D. M., Abrams, E. D., & Kull, J. A. (1998). Can we be scientists too? Secondary students' perceptions of scientific research from a project-based classroom. Journal of Science, Education, and Technology, 7(2), 140-161.

Muijs, D. (2011). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. SAGE.

Mullis, I. V. S. & Jenkins, L. B. (1988). The Science Report Card: Elements of Risk and Recovery (Rep. No. 175-01). Princeton.

Nainggolan, B., Hutabarat, W., Situmorang, M., & Sitorus, M. (2020). Developing innovative chemistry laboratory workbook integrated with project-based learning and character-based chemistry. International Journal of Instruction, 13(3), 895-908.

Nelson, T. (2005). Knowledge interactions in teacher–scientist partnerships: Negotiation, consultation, and rejection. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(4), 382–395.

Newell, A. D., Zientek, L. R., Tharp, B. Z., Vogt, G. L., & Moreno, N. P. (2015). Students' attitudes toward science as predictors of gains on student content knowledge: Benefits of an after-school program. School science and mathematics, 115(5), 216-225.

Peker, D., Dolan, E. (2012). Helping students make meaning of authentic investigations: findings from a student–teacher–scientist partnership. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7(1), 223–244.

Poliseli, L. (2020). Emergence of scientific understanding in real-time ecological research practice. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 42(4), 1-25.

Ponto, J. (2015). Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research. Journal of the Advanced Practitioner Oncology, 6(2),168–171.

Rahm, J., Miller, H. C., Hartley, L., & Moore, J. C. (2003). The value of an emergent notion of authenticity: Examples from two student/teacher–scientist partnership programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 737-756.

Richmond, G. & Kurth, L. A. (1999). Moving from outside to inside: High school students'use of apprenticeships as vehicles for entering the culture and practice of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(6), 677–697.

Richtie, S. M. & Rigano, D. L. (1996). Laboratory apprenticeship through a student research project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(7), 799–815.

Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., & Walberg-Henriksson, H. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

Ross, R. M., Harnik, P. G., Allmon, W. D., Sherpa, J. M., Goldman, A. M., Nester, P. L., & Chiment, J. J. (2003). The mastodon matrix project: An experiment with large-scale public collaboration in paleontological research. Journal of Geoscience Education, 51(1), 39-47.

Salame, I. I., Sabi, S., & Hamid, S. (2020). A study of the GLOBE program and its impact on public school teachers and their students. Journal of Academic Perspectives, 1, 1-19.

Samsudin, M. A., Jamali, S. M., Zain, A. N. M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2020). The effect of stem project based learning on self-efficacy among high-school physics students. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17 (1), 94-108.

Sanchez-Muñoz, R., Carrió, M., Rodríguez, G., Pérez, N., & Moyano, E. (2020). A hybrid strategy to develop real-life competences combining flipped classroom, jigsaw method and project-based learning. Journal of Biological Education, 1-12.

Sarı, U., Duygu, E., Şen, Ö.F., & Kırındı, T. (2020). The effect of STEM education on scientific process skills and STEM awareness in simulation based inquiry learning environment. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(3), 387-405.

Schwortz, A. C., & Burrows, A. C. (2020). Authentic science experiences with STEM datasets: postsecondary results and potential gender influences. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1-21.

Shanahan, M. C., & Bechtel, R. (2020). "We're taking their brilliant minds": Science teacher expertize, meta‐discourse, and the challenges of teacher–scientist collaboration. Science Education, 104(2), 354-387.

Schuster, D. A., & Carlsen, W. S. (2009). Scientists' teaching orientations in the context of teacher professional development. Science Education, 93(4), 635–655.

Shein, P. P., & Tsai, C. (2015) Impact of a scientist–teacher collaborative model on students, teachers, and scientists. International Journal of Science Education, 37(13), 2147-2169.

Tanner, K. D., Chatman, L., & Allen. D. (2003). Approaches to Biology teaching and learning: Science teaching and learning across the school-university divide- cultivating conversations through scientist-teacher partnerships. Cell Biology Education, 2, 195-201.

Ufnar, J. A., & Shepherd, V. L. (2018). The scientist in the classroom partnership program: An innovative teacher professional development model. Professional Development in Education, 44(3), 1-17

Tinker, R. S. (1997). Student-scientist partnerships: Shrewd maneuvers. In K. C. Cohen (Ed.), Internet links for science education: Student-scientist partnerships (pp. 5–15). Plenum Press.

TÜBİTAK (2020). https://www.tubitak.gov.tr/tr/haber/14-ortaokul-ogrencileri-arastirma-projelerifinal-yarismasi-sonuclandi

Yeung, W. K., & Sun, D. (2021). An exploration of inquiry-based authentic learning enabled by mobile technology for primary science. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 15(1), 1-28.

Willcuts, M.H. (2009). Scientist-teacher partnerships as professional development: An action research study. Report prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract DE-AC0576RL01830.

Wormstead, S. J., Becker, M. L., & Congalton, R. G. (2002). Tools for successful student–teacher– scientist partnerships. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11(3), 277-287.

Wurstner, S., Herr, C., Andrews, G., & Alley, K. (2005). Teacher/Scientist Partnership Develops a Simulated Natural Disaster Scenario to Enhance Student Learning. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(5), 522-530.