The use of the Interconnected Model of Teacher Professional Growth for understanding the development of science teachers’ knowledge on models and modelling
Introduction
There is a general agreement in the educational research community about the importance of teachers’ professional development as one of the ways to improve education. However, there is no consensus about how such a process occurs and how it can be analysed and promoted. This may be because it was only in the last decades that the nature and development of teachers’ knowledge started to be understood by educational researchers (Munby, Russel, & Martin, 2001).
According to Sprinthall, Reiman, and Thies-Sprinthall (1996), there have been three main general models for explaining teachers’ development: the craft, the expert, and the interactive models. The first model advocates the view that teachers develop as a result of becoming experienced teachers. In this case, knowledge emerges from classroom experiences. However, the model does not make clear how teachers produce new meanings from their experiences nor why some teachers only reproduce the same experience many times without learning from it.
The expert model is focused on teachers’ being taught what and how to do by experts. As discussed by Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002), for a long time changes in teachers’ knowledge have been assumed to be the results of ‘training’, that is, of something that is done to teachers and in which they are relatively passive participants. Moreover, the outcomes of such changes are generally ‘measured’ at the end of the training. This situation may be compared with the application of a test to students at the end of the teaching of a given curricular topic, in which good results cannot be associated with the learning of the topic.
In order to support teachers’ knowledge building, many researchers have recognised that such processes should involve active meaningful learning. This is the basis of what Sprinthall et al. (1996) characterised as interactive models. Although models characterised as interactive present particularities concern with how teachers’ learning is both analysed and supported, they assume the occurrence of a process of changing prior knowledge with some help from experts. Within this perspective, one of the models proposed for teachers’ professional growth was the one by Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002), called the Interconnected Model of Teacher Professional Growth (IMTPG). Their model is represented in Fig. 1 and briefly explained below.
According to this model, the teachers’ world is constituted by four distinct domains that change through the mediating processes of ‘reflection’ and ‘enactment’ (represented as arrows linking the domains). The multiplicity of possible pathways between the domains reflects the complexity of teachers’ professional development. Moreover, the authors explain that
The term “enactment” was chosen to distinguish the translation of a belief or a pedagogical model into action from simply “acting”, on the grounds that acting occurs in the domain of practice, and each action represents the enactment of something a teacher knows, believes or has experienced (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002, p. 951).
In the present study, the focus was on the development of science teachers’ knowledge on models and modelling. According to the authors of the IMTPG, if we focus our attention on teacher knowledge,
teacher growth becomes a process of the construction of a variety of knowledge types (content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge) by individual teachers in response to their participation in the experiences provided by the professional development program and through their participation in the classroom (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002, p. 955).
Because this perspective fits well with our belief that teachers should be actively involved in a process of knowledge building in order to develop their knowledge, we decided to use the IMTPG as the basic framework for designing a professional development project, as part of a teacher training programme. We also used the IMTPG as a framework for analysing our data. The main aim of this paper is to make evident both how we conducted our analysis and how the use of the IMTPG as an analytical framework supported our understanding of teachers’ knowledge growth that occurred within the context of a professional development project concerned with models and modelling in science.
Section snippets
Some issues about models and modelling in science and in science education
Many meanings are attached to the notion of models. Generally speaking, in science a model may be defined as a non-unique, partial representation of a target, focusing on specific aspects of it (Gilbert, Boulter, & Elmer, 2000). The term “target” refers to, for instance, a system, an object, an event, a process or an idea. Therefore, a prototype airplane, a mathematical equation that describes a specific movement, and the models for the atom that were proposed to characterise and explain how
Overview of our project
Assuming (i) the inadequacies present in science teachers’ content knowledge, curricular knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) on models and modelling, (ii) the importance of providing opportunities for changing and improving their knowledge in this area, and (iii) the limitations of the few initiatives in this direction, the aims of our project were:
- 1.
The production of an ‘external domain’ comprised of activities (organised in a course) aiming at the development of teachers’ content
The use of the IMTPG in analysing the data
Due to the complexity of both the IMPTG and the subject matter involved in our project (models and modelling in science), in order to be able to characterise the development of teachers’ knowledge, some steps were necessary. First, it was essential to identify the particular aspects that characterised teachers’ knowledge about models and modelling in both science and science teaching. Second, we had to identify the particular content or meaning of each of the domains of the IMTPG in this
Analysis of the use of the IMTPG in the current research project
We extracted some examples from the huge quantity of data that we analysed in order to illustrate the current discussion. In doing so, we also tried to select instances that could be understood by those who are not familiar with the subject of models and modelling in science. In some cases, we added comments to facilitate the readers’ understanding.
According to the authors of the IMTPG, it can be used as an analytical, a predictive, and an interrogatory tool. In order to analyse the outcomes of
Concluding remarks and implications
In the introduction to this paper, we stated that our main aim was to explore and demonstrate the usefulness of the IMTPG as a framework both to design a professional development project, and, most importantly, to analyse and understand the growth of teachers’ knowledge within the context of this project. We think that, from the discussion of the previous section, it is clear that the IMTPG was successful with respect to both objectives. As for the design of the professional development
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Fundação Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES, Brazil) and Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO, The Netherlands) for the financial support for the development of the research project from which this paper originated.
References (34)
- et al.
Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth
Teaching and Teacher Education
(2002) - et al.
Nature, assessment and measurement of pedagogical content knowledge
- et al.
The professional development of teachers
- et al.
Designing professional development that works
Educational Leadership
(2000) - et al.
Learning to teach
- et al.
Research methods in education
(2000) - et al.
Models of science education
- Crawford, B. A., & Cullin, M. J. (2002). Engaging prospective science teachers in building, testing, and teaching about...
- et al.
Mental modelling
Developing professional practice and competence
(1994)
Philosophy of chemistry: An emergent field with implications for chemistry education
Science & Education
Pedagogical content knowledge: An introduction and orientation
Models in science and science education
Positioning models in science education and in design and technology education
Models in explanations, part 1: Horses for courses?
International Journal of Science Education
Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling
International Journal of Science Education
Cited by (68)
Tracing teachers’ change of pedagogical design capacity through professional development
2024, Journal of Curriculum StudiesWhy does teacher learning vary in professional development? Accounting for organisational conditions
2024, Professional Development in EducationDefinitions and a Review of Relevant Theories, Frameworks, and Approaches
2024, Springer Briefs in EducationBeyond “Having Fun” As Evidence of Learning: A Longitudinal Case Study of a Teacher’s Evolving Conception of Hands-On Science Activities
2023, Journal of Science Education and Technology