SCIENCE TEACHER EDUCATION

Julie A. Bianchini and Sherry Southerland, Section Coeditors

Early Career Secondary Science Teachers: A Longitudinal Study of Beliefs in Relation to Field Experiences
STEVEN S. FLETCHER School of Education, St. Edwards University, Austin, TX 78704, USA JULIE A. LUFT School of Life Sciences, Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA

Received 30 January 2010; revised 24 September 2010; 19 December 2010; accepted 22 December 2010 DOI 10.1002/sce.20450 Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).

ABSTRACT: This 3-year longitudinal study explores the evolving beliefs of ve prospective secondary science teachers in a university preparation program from recruitment through their rst year in the classroom. As an interpretive qualitative study, data were collected through semistructured interviews and an array of artifacts. The data sources were used to construct cases, which led to a cross-case analysis to understand the important themes in the project. There are three important conclusions from this study. First, the teachers beliefs about teaching initially shift to a contemporary focus while participating in their teacher preparation program, but ultimately return to a didactic orientation by their
Correspondence to: Steven S. Fletcher; e-mail: stevenf@stedwards.edu Contract grant sponsor: National Science Foundation. Contract grant number: 0550847. The ndings, conclusions, or opinions herein represent the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the view of personnel afliated with the National Science Foundation.
C

2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

FLETCHER AND LUFT

rst year in the classroom. At the same time, the teachers beliefs about learning remain consistently more contemporary in nature. Finally, when the participants were enrolled in coursework with a eld placement that emphasized reform-based teaching, their beliefs about teaching and learning were impacted in different ways based on the context of the placement and the individual. The ndings from this study contribute to a deeper understanding of the development of science teachers beliefs about teaching and learning and the role that early eld experiences play from preservice education through the induction C 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 1 23, 2011 years.

INTRODUCTION In the eld of science teacher development, teacher beliefs have fascinated and frustrated researchers for over 30 years. It is clear that teacher beliefs are foundational in the decisions teachers make about instruction, and researchers are captivated by the role that beliefs play in teacher decision-making. Frustration arises when researchers turn to the connection between beliefs and practices. Simply put, researchers have yet to fully understand how beliefs guide practice. Current work on teacher beliefs in science education can be characterized by several viewpoints. One view holds that the belief systems of preservice, induction, and in-service teachers are difcult to both describe and measure. This is due in part to a limited understanding of how beliefs are formed, and a lack of agreement on the composition of belief (Jones & Carter, 2007). A second view suggests that teachers personal belief systems about teaching and learning may be at odds with current reforms in science education, with a greater disconnect evident in the early years of teaching. Bridging this gap often entails varying the intensity of eld experience in order to challenge emerging and existing teacher beliefs (Crawford, 2007; Jones & Carter, 2007; Lemberger, Hewson, & Park, 1999). A third view pertains to the different levels of teachers commitments to their beliefs about teaching and learning. Teachers can remain strongly committed to some beliefs, or they can modify their beliefs signicantly when confronted with the realities of classroom teaching (Haney & McArthur, 2002; Simmons et al., 1999; Yerrick & Hoving, 2003). Finally, we know that belief systems are important lters that shape how prospective teachers view the world (Wideen, Mayer-Smith, & Moon, 1998), and this in turn inuences the instructional decisions they make. Despite this authority to shape classroom behaviors, there often appears to be frequent variance between beginning teachers conceptions and their practice (Crawford, 1999; Haney & McArthur, 2002). Yet even with the variety of views on the nature of teachers beliefs, researchers continue to study and discuss this topic. Early career teachers have received considerable attention. These teachers often participate in preservice programs that support reform-based instruction, and they are the most likely to reframe their beliefs in ways that are conducive to student learning. Within a preservice program, eld experiences can play a signicant role in the development of a teachers beliefs. Consequently, we need to understand how to effectively build early eld practices so that they both challenge teachers beliefs about teaching and learning, and support the development of beliefs that align with current ideas about how children learn science. Most of the research on science teacher beliefs has centered to a large degree on the educational experience of elementary science teachers and has been relatively short in duration. Few longitudinal studies follow teachers for more than a year in the early part of their careers, and even fewer studies follow teachers from preservice through their rst years (Luft, 2009). This study was developed to contribute to the limited knowledge base about the relationship between eld experiences and the beliefs of early career teachers as
Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS

they consider how teaching and learning occur in science. It follows ve secondary science teachers from their rst experience in a teacher education program through their rst year in the classroom. The guiding questions are as follows:

Do the beliefs of early career secondary science teachers about teaching and learning change from their preservice education program through their rst years of teaching? If so, how? How do eld experiences that emphasize reform-based science teaching strategies impact the developing beliefs of teachers over the length of their preservice program and their rst year of teaching?

TEACHER DEVELOPMENT Teacher development is the theoretical frame that encompasses this investigation. This model proposes that effective teacher development occurs when powerful learning experiences are sustained through every stage, from preservice through induction. Feiman-Nemser (2001), in one of the few papers to discuss the early career of an educator, suggested that early career teachers should engage differently in the phases of preservice and induction. For instance, she suggested that teachers who are just beginning the process of preservice education should examine their beliefs in relationship to what is deemed good instruction, whereas those who have completed the induction phase of their career should extend and deepen their subject matter knowledge. Even though the relationship that beliefs have to instruction is not well understood, there is compelling evidence that beliefs should be considered early in ones teaching career in science (Jones & Carter, 2007). Feiman-Nemsers (2001) model suggests that teachers develop their practices throughout their preparation phase as they complete their coursework. During a teachers preservice program, the teacher has the opportunity to consider how science should be taught. These experiences increase in complexity and in demand as teachers interact with students in a classroom. In the United States, the National Science Education Standards (NSES) (National Research Council [NRC], 1996) describe a vision for the enactment of inquiry in science classrooms and for how teachers should learn to teach science in an inquiry format. For preservice teachers, there should be an emphasis on learning to teach science in authentic classroom settings with actual students and through the examination of real student work and supporting curriculum materials (NRC, 1996, p. 67). As teachers work in collegial learning environments, they develop their abilities to create instruction that allows students to ask questions, collect data, analyze data, and share their ndings. Thus, the term reform-based is used here to describe the development and orientation of the participants beliefs and practices when they align with the principles from the NSES. SUPPORTING RESEARCH Dening Beliefs Beliefs are often dened as personal constructs that are important to a teachers practice; they guide instructional decisions, inuence classroom management, impact the representation of the content, and provide a lens through which to understand classroom events (Jones & Carter, 2007; Nespor, 1987; Pajares, 1992; Richardson, 1996). It should be noted that beliefs are different from knowledge in that they do not require a condition of truth (Richardson, 1996). This is because beliefs are developed through experiences, are value laden, and reect the personal stories that are created to understand and negotiate ones existence in the world (Nespor, 1987).
Science Education

FLETCHER AND LUFT

Beliefs of Early Career Teachers Many researchers have noted the importance of acknowledging beliefs when planning preservice programs (Feiman-Nemser, 2001; Haney, Czerniak, & Lumpe 1996). By taking into account the beliefs of preservice teachers, science teacher educators can congure programs that challenge and cultivate beliefs that are conducive to reform-based practices. But taking beliefs into account is difcult, as beliefs are impacted by different experiences throughout a preservice program (Jones & Carter, 2007; Richardson, 1996). For those in teacher education, attention to the course and eld experiences in a program are important in order to cultivate the beliefs of teachers during a preservice program. Recent work exploring science teacher belief systems has revealed the complexity of these systems and their relationship to practice. Findings from a study by Bryan (2003) underscored the convoluted nature of prospective science teachers belief systems and the interaction of those belief systems with actions in the classroom. Bryan examined the belief systems of a preservice elementary science teacher (Barbara) as she progressed through a university preparation program, and charted these beliefs against the same teachers actions in the classroom as she completed her student teaching experience. Findings from this study revealed that Barbara had a complex and interrelated set of beliefs that included foundational and dualistic systems. The foundational beliefs related to the nature of science and classroom management, and were stable throughout her preparation. The dualistic set of beliefs included didactic beliefs that guided her observed practice and more contemporary, student-centered beliefs that guided her vision of her practice. This dichotomy between the promoted and the performed beliefs points to the importance of identifying and studying more completely the relationship between beliefs and practice. Others like Bryan (2003) have noted the complexity of beliefs (e.g., Crawford, 2007; Wallace & Kang, 2004; Windschitl, 2003). In a recent study conducted by Crawford, ve secondary preservice science teachers enrolled in a year-long eld-based preparation program were interviewed about their beliefs about teaching science with an inquiry-based focus. Despite strong mentoring from experienced teachers who promoted an inquiry-based approach, ndings suggest that each participant practiced teaching differently. Some taught traditional, didactic, lecture-driven lessons, whereas others produced open-ended inquirybased work that attended to students interests. In addition, the choices they made about their practice seemed related to both epistemological beliefs about the nature of science as a discipline, as well as their deeply held personal beliefs about the way secondary students learn science best.

Different Levels of Commitment to Beliefs In a recent examination of early career teachers personal epistemologies, Kang (2008) reported that the teachers with well-developed models of their own ways of learning and knowledge tend to espouse and enact reform-based ways of teaching during practicum experiences. In an unexpected nding, Kang also found that over 30% of the teachers in the study articulated more developed and sophisticated personal epistemologies. This nding may give insight into how early eld experiences might inuence the formation and permanence of reform-based beliefs about teaching and learning. For Kangs students, the change in personal epistemology might not lead to a permanent change. Indeed, most researchers that have worked on exploring beliefs about teaching and learning science suggest that teachers hold core beliefs that are resistant to change and peripheral beliefs that are emerging (Rokeach, 1968; Nespor, 1987). The core beliefs have been held by teachers for a long period of time, but when teachers enter formal preparation
Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS

programs, they are often exposed to new perspectives or novel experiences. In this case, new beliefs develop that are tentative in nature, as they have not encountered fortifying experiences. These beliefs may be subject to evaluation and change more readily than the more stable core beliefs (Pajares, 1992; Rokeach, 1968). Field Experiences for Teachers Wilson, Floden, and Ferrini-Mundy (2001) report on the variety of types, objectives, and settings of eld experiences. First, most science teacher preparation programs now include a variety of eld experiences. These experiences can have different intentions. Some research has found that the eld experience provides beginning teachers with an opportunity to focus on procedural pedagogical issues like management (Moore, 2003), whereas others have concluded that the eld experiences provide teachers with an opportunity to connect theory to practice more effectively (Beeth & Adanan, 2006; Tigchelaar & Korthagen, 2004). Clift and Brady (2005), in their review of research on eld experiences, concluded that prospective teachers may hold newly formed and contemporary beliefs about teaching science but are hindered when confronted with the complexity of a classroom. The settings allotted for eld experiences may also vary from haphazard settings with ill-matched mentor teachers to highly structured professional development schools (PDS) with explicit focus on professional development for both novice and experienced teachers. Field experiences also vary in length, from early eld experiences that require a few hours of observation per semester to 1-year student-teaching assignments. Regardless of the type, setting, or length, research suggests that eld experiences are viewed as powerful by both beginning and experienced teachers (Wilson et al., 2001). This enthusiasm may or may not translate to more effective teaching, but it does provide insight into the importance that the participants place on this type of activity. Field experiences are complicated, and deconstructing what teachers actually learn from them is a difcult undertaking (Huling, 1998). Some suggest framing eld experiences as complex systems with myriad interactions (Mewborn, 2000; Wideen et al., 1998). These interactions may include the interface of physical and cultural boundaries, as well as the relationships between students, prospective teachers, teacher colleagues, mentor teachers, and administrators at the site, and with supervisors and faculty at the university (Mewborn, 2000). As with any complex system, the route to stability is punctuated by tensions and conicts that help dene the path. Beach and Pearson (1998) identied four categories of tensions and conicts in their study of students in a year-long eld experience. These issues included problems with (a) curriculum and instruction, which consist of conicts with mandated curriculum, student interests and motivation, use of inquiry/constructivist teaching techniques, and timing; (b) interpersonal relationships, which consist of conicts with peers, students, mentor teachers, administration, and university supervisors; (c) roles, which are a result of the tension surrounding the shift from student to teacher, or uncertainty as to role as teacher or friend; and (d) contextual and institutional issues, which consist of differences in beliefs/and values within the school culture. METHODOLOGY This is an interpretivist study in which qualitative methods were utilized to collect and analyze data from the participants in order to investigate the developing teaching and learning beliefs of preservice science teachers. Pajares (1992) called beliefs a messy construct. In order to unravel the complex nature of each persons conceptions it was
Science Education

FLETCHER AND LUFT

TABLE 1 Field Experience Hours Per Course in the Program

Course Recruitment 1 (R1) Recruitment 2 (R2) Teacherstudent interactions (Interact) Project-based Instruction (PBI) Student teaching (ST) Observation Hours 2 1 3 4 40 Teaching Hours 3 3 5 10 240 Total Field Experience Hours 5 4 8 23 280

necessary to nd research tools and techniques that attended to the unique context of each study participant. The case study methodology (Stake, 2005; Yin 2004) with an additional cross-case analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Yin 2004) was an appropriate approach. This allowed for an exploration both within and across each case throughout time, and to build a deeper understanding of the nature of the participants beliefs. This process began by building rich individual cases with each participant. The cases were then compared to one another, noting salient themes that surfaced within and between the cases. The following sections will more completely describe the context, study population, and data collection and analysis techniques used for the study. Research Context First introduced in 1997, the teacher preparation program in this study offers a 4-year course sequence for undergraduates and a three-semester option for postbaccalaureate students who hold a mathematics or science undergraduate degree. Taught by a variety of faculty from multiple departments, over 400 secondary science and mathematics education students a year participate in the courses taught by either experienced classroom teachers or university faculty. The experienced classroom teachers, who are instructors, are former mathematics and science teachers employed by the program as master teachers. They typically teach the rst two courses in the sequence, as well as the student teaching seminar. The faculty in the program are involved in the instruction of the core program courses, and they are faculty from the college of science and education. There is a frequent dialogue about the courses and program between the master teachers and the faculty, which results in course modications. Table 1 gives an overview of the eld course hours per course in the program. An introduction to the preparation program begins with a pair of one-credit recruitment courses that are designed to attract students to careers in mathematics and science teaching. Both courses include a tuition rebate for students as a recruitment incentive to consider science teaching. In these courses, the instructor demonstrates inquiry-based science lessons and instructional practices that align with the NSES (NRC, 1996). There is a eld experience in each course. The rst eld experience consists of teaching an inquiry-based science lesson for 3 days to elementary-aged students using the 5E instructional model. The second course builds on this rst, and includes a eld experience of teaching an inquiry-based science lesson for 3 days to a group of middle-school students. In both settings, a kit-based curriculum is used as the basis for the lessons that follow the NSES (NRC, 1996). The program rationale for working with younger students during the introductory eld experiences centers on the positive student feedback that is typically given to the university
Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS

student. In the elementary setting, a university student who uses hands-on science activities is viewed favorably by students. The instructors of the course hope that the positive feedback from elementary children convinces university students to pursue an educational career. These two courses are rich in reective practice. As the university student is teaching, the student considers how his/her instruction is impacting student knowledge. At the conclusion of each lesson, the course instructor and classroom teacher gives feedback to the university student about his/her performance. At the end of the eld experience, the university student writes a reective statement on the experience that focuses on the successes and challenges encountered in the classroom. When students complete this sequence, they may apply and be accepted into the program. From this point on, they are viewed as preservice teachers. The next courses in the program sequence are designed to reinforce aspects of the NSES (NRC, 1996) found in the program and to build upon the eld experiences from the recruitment courses. The rst course focuses on current learning theory and cognition, and has no eld experience. The following course highlights interactions between the preservice teacher and students in the classroom. This course, referred to as teacherstudent interactions, includes a eld experience of approximately 8 days. During this course, preservice teachers focus on teaching and learning with attention to how curriculum and technology are used to cultivate teacherstudent interactions. Teams of two preservice teachers design multiday inquiry-based lessons and coteach these lessons twice over the semester. Both sets of lessons are video taped. Revisions between the rst and second set of lessons are based upon university instructor and classroom teacher observation feedback, as well as personal reection after viewing video of the lesson. This course provides an in-depth examination of how to teach with a reform-based perspective, and includes multiple opportunities for students to build a strong knowledge base of current practices in science education. The next course in this program builds on student learning through investigation of project-based instructional strategies in mathematics and science. In project-based instruction (PBI), preservice students work in teams to design multidisciplinary learning units that span several days and that revolve around authentic issues, an important component of reform-based science teaching. When the units are designed, pairs of students teach their project-based lessons to secondary students. This class emphasizes building and teaching the unit. The capstone student teaching experience for the preservice teachers in the program includes a minimum of 4 hours daily at an assigned campus, teaching two class periods for at least 12 weeks. During the student teaching experience, preservice teachers are eased into the role of classroom teacher and take on full responsibility for instruction, assessment, and management. The cooperating teacher provides day-to-day feedback to the student teacher, and university supervisors (master teachers or graduate students) visit approximately every other week and provide additional feedback. The emphasis on feedback aligns with the reform-based orientation of the program. While the student teachers are in schools, they also attend a weekly student teacher seminar at the university. They create a comprehensive teaching portfolio with artifacts from content and pedagogical coursework, sample lesson unit plans, sample student work from teaching experiences, and videoaudio transcripts from teaching. The teacher then links these artifacts to reform-based themes from the program. Themes for the portfolio include subject matter knowledge, classroom instruction, issues of equity, communication, and professional development. Two other courses are part of the preservice education program, but they do not require eld experience and focus on the nature of science. The rst course has students design studies, devise data collection methods, conduct analyses of the data, and communicate the ndings of these authentic scientic investigations. The second course explores the history and philosophy of science, the lives of scientists, and the impact of society on their science.
Science Education

FLETCHER AND LUFT

Study Population The participants for this study came from a group of 56 students who were invited via email to participate in a longitudinal study about their beliefs. From this pool, 17 indicated a willingness to participate in the study. These university students reviewed and signed informed consent paperwork and ofcially joined the study. From this population the study population emerged, consisting of ve preservice teachers who successfully completed the science teacher preparation program and who started their career in education. The other 12 from the original study had either left the program, were employed in nonteaching positions, or were still completing coursework in the program. A detailed description of those who have left and stayed can be found in Luft, Fletcher, and Fortney (2005), and the ve participants (using pseudonyms) in this study are described in the following paragraphs.
Jan. Jans path to a career in teaching started after a reevaluation of her childhood goal to become a dentist. After consulting with family and friends who were already in the teacher preparation program, Jan decided to switch her focus to teaching. She was happy to be in a program that included friends and a sense of community, and chose science teaching not because of positive experiences with her previous teachers (her own high-school biology experience was very negative, based on the teacher), but because she had traditionally done well in science and her friends were in the program. Walt. Walt started his undergraduate degree following a few semesters at a local community college to garner needed science course credits. He became interested in teaching science after a back injury and work layoff gave him the opportunity to change careers. Data from the initial demographics interview indicated that Walt wanted a job that makes a difference. Teaching matched this interest along with previous positive experiences as a trainer in the military and private sectors. Interview data suggests that Walt began the preparation program self-condent and excited to teach and make a difference in the world. Chris. Chriss path to teaching was circuitous. After a few years in the military and some time preparing for a chemical engineering degree, he switched to the teacher preparation program, citing two high-school teachers as demanding yet supportive inuences along with a desire to live for more than nancial success (his stated reason for choosing chemical engineering). Chris entered the program ready to learn about and model the characteristics he admired in his teachers from high school. Noelle. Noelles interest in teaching science was piqued after experiences tutoring friends in high-school science classes and working as an undergraduate teaching assistant at her rst university. Noelle started her path toward teaching at another university directly from high school, and was one semester from nishing that degree when personal reasons caused a transfer to the preparation program in this study. She had taken a number of education courses prior to her acceptance to the preparation program, but was excited to be a part of the program after learning about the reputation of the program and the university in general. Hal. Hal came to teaching through a general interest in science, after spending a number of years exploring different career options. He had taken coursework as an electrical engineer, pharmacy major, and nally a biology major with a teaching emphasis. He decided to stop making teaching his secondary choice and focus on it as a career. Hal chose to teach science because it makes just a little more sense than the other subjects hes taken. He entered the preparation program determined to learn all he could about teaching science and sharing his own enthusiasm for ecology and biology with students.

Data Collection Throughout the study, data were collected from the university students/preservice teachers at least once a year while they were participating in the teacher certication program.
Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS TABLE 2 Description of Phases of the Study
Phase Recruitment Description of Phase Refers to the rst year in the program and includes the initial views of the teacher Data Sources

General interview 1 TBI interview 1 Field notes Artifacts from coursework General interview 2,3 TBI interview 2,3 Field notes Artifacts from coursework General interview 4,5 TBI interview 4,5 Field notes Artifacts from teaching

Coursework

Refers to the time when the teacher is taking the majority of teacher preparation courses and are engaged in early eld experiences Refers to the time when the teacher is student teaching or is employed as a rst-year teacher

Teaching

The data collection cycle began during their rst year in the program, and continued while they completed the science teacher education program. After graduation, and when these teachers entered their induction years, another round of data were collected. During this period of time, ve complete rounds of interview and artifact data were amassed. To help organize the study, we split it into three phases labeled recruitment, coursework, and teaching. Table 2 indicates the data collected at each phase. Descriptions of the data collection process are in the following paragraphs. Interview data were collected at yearly intervals from the participants through two hourlong interviews. These interviews were structured to provide enough information to create descriptions of the candidates belief systems. Two sets of questions were asked during the interview process. The participants were rst asked general questions and then in the second round more focused questions that related to their beliefs about teaching and learning. In addition, the participant was encouraged to bring any artifacts that related to their development as a teacher. In this way, a number of different data sources were collected to inform our evolving cases. Each interview was digitally recorded using a handheld digital audio recorder and notes that were taken by the interviewer. All interviews were transcribed. Fletcher conducted the majority of the interviews and collection of artifacts, but Luft and a research assistant also collected data. All of the teachers in this study were interviewed by at least two different people throughout the data collection process. This limited the potential for the progressive subjectivity of the primary researcher toward a self-fullling and subjective interpretation of the participants development as teachers (Mertens, 1998). To gather primary information about the history and background of each candidate, we asked a series of demographic questions during the rst interview session to capture the students area of specialization, status in the program, and courses that were currently being taken. We also collected background information about the participants highest degree, experience as a teacher, and family background. In each subsequent year, the interview focused on the preservice teachers experiences with the content of the courses in the teacher preparation program, their current views about teaching science, and their interaction with students during their eld placement. The teachers were also asked to reect on the most and least important learning experiences in relation to becoming science teachers, discuss any artifacts that they brought, and share their plans for the upcoming year. This interview
Science Education

10

FLETCHER AND LUFT

TABLE 3 TBI Questions

Question 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Format How do (will) you maximize student learning in your classroom? How do you describe your role as teacher? How do your students learn science best? In the public school setting, how do you decide what to teach and what not to teach? How do you decide to move on to a new topic? How do you know when students understand? How do you know learning is occurring in the classroom? Area Addressed Environment Student knowledge Learning Student and standards Assessment Understanding Student response

was conducted each year, while the teachers were enrolled in preservice coursework from recruitment courses to student teaching, or at the end of the rst year in the classroom. The interview format was semistructured, consisting of a set of open-ended questions that focused the conversation on the topic of interest to the researcher but allowed the participant freedom to expand or diverge on areas of importance (Patton, 1990). In addition to the general interview, the study participants beliefs were documented with the teacher beliefs interview (TBI) protocol (Luft & Roehrig, 2007). This semistructured interview protocol focused on seven central questions that concern teachers ideas about teaching and learning science in the areas of instruction and assessment, with questions such as: How do you decide what to teach in your classroom? How do you know if students are learning? How do you decide to move on in your classroom? A thorough discussion of the use and history of this instrument can be found in Luft and Roehrig (2007). The TBI questions and topic of beliefs that they address are listed in Table 3. To gather evidence about the preservice teachers beliefs about teaching and learning, we collected lesson/unit plans developed by the teachers and relevant education and content coursework. When the participants were engaged in early eldwork that was embedded in the program, documents were collected that specically aligned with this experience (e.g., handouts, lesson plans, mentor teacher feedback sheets, observational notes from observers). From rst-year teachers, we collected documents that included lessons and the associated student work. Each teacher was also observed in his/her classroom and notes from this observation were included in the artifact le. Artifacts were primarily chosen by the teachers, although we specically asked for some documents, and some artifacts (observations) were generated by us. This evidence was collected at the time of the interview and throughout the year. It was collected to support and to supplement the participants stated beliefs about teaching and learning as well as their perceived development as teachers. Yin (2004) states that document and other artifact collection is helpful to provide either additional explanatory or contradictory evidence for the stated beliefs of the respondents. Data Analysis In an effort to create a robust, accurate, and credible study, factors contributing to the trustworthiness of the data analysis (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) were addressed using verication strategies as suggested by Creswell (1998). These strategies included (a) triangulation of data through both structured and semistructured interviews, eld notes from observations,
Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS TABLE 4 TBI Categories With Example Responses
Category Example

11

Traditional: Focus on information, transmission, structure, or sources Instructive: Focus on providing experiences, teacher-focus, or teacher decision Transitional: Focus on teacherstudent relationships, subjective decisions, or affective response Responsive: Focus on collaboration, feedback, or knowledge development Reform-based: Focus on mediating student knowledge or interactions

I am an all-knowing sage. My role is to deliver information. I want to maintain a student focus to minimize disruptions. I want to provide students with experiences in laboratory science (no elaboration). I want a good rapport with my students, so I do what they like in science. I am responsible for guiding students in their development of understanding and process skills. I want to set up my classroom so that students can take charge of their own learning. My role is to provide students with experiences in science, which allows me to understand their knowledge and how they are making sense of science. My instruction needs to be modied accordingly so that students understand key concepts in science.

and artifact collection; (b) member checking with participants after their individual cases were constructed to ensure delity from the study; (c) the creation of a rich narrative account for each case to build a complete picture of the complexity of the study; and( d) the multiyear collection of data to help build a robust vision of the participants evolving beliefs and practices over time. The organization of data began with a collection of the data by participant. For the general interviews, researcher eld notes were then inserted and sections coded during the reading of the transcriptions (Bogdan & Biklen, 2006). The artifact data collected at this time were scanned and also coded, but only when the artifacts related to the beliefs of the teacher. These documents were then sorted chronologically and placed in each participants le (Miles & Huberman, 1994). For the beliefs portion of this study, we drew upon the coding categories from the TBI (Luft & Roehrig, 2007). The coded categories of possible responses on the TBI interview maps are arranged from a traditional, teacher-centered approach (traditional and instructive categories) to a student-centered or reform-based orientation (instructive or reform-based). A central transitional category refers to responses from teachers that include students but on a supercial level. Table 4 presents the range of TBI coding categories with a description of the main traits demonstrated by teachers for each one. To analyze the responses of the teachers from the open-interview and the TBI questions, we coded the responses with an eye toward the possible responses stated in Luft and Roehrig (2007). Responses were coded and deductively analyzed to determine the alignment or not with the stated categories. Audiotape and transcripts were at times both examined in order to guard against errors in transcription and capture any nuances in tone that spoken answers may evoke. In order to clearly track the participants beliefs chronologically, we created a beliefs matrix for beliefs about teaching and learning for each participant, which are shared in the Findings section.
Science Education

12

FLETCHER AND LUFT

Walts beliefs about learning d. How do you maximize student learning? e. How do you know when students understand? f. How do students learn science best? g. How do you know learning is occurring in the classroom?
Te acher-centered------------------Student-centered Trad Inst Trans Resp RBased Interview 1 Interview 2

Walts beliefs about teaching a. What is your role as teacher? b. How do you decide what to teach? c. When do you move on to a new topic?

Walt's courses completed at time of interview Cog - Cognition R1- recruitment 1 Inq- Inquiry research R2- recruitment 2 methods Interact- Interactions PBI project-based Inst HPS Hist/Phil Sci ST Student teaching
Courses completed with FE Interview 1 Courses completed without FE

Teacher-centere d-----------------Student-centered Trad Inst Trans Resp RBased Interview 1 Interview 2 Interview 3 Interview 4 Interview 5

a,b,c a,b,c b,c a,b,c a,b c a

d,f,g d,f e,g d,f,g e

Interview 2 Interview 3 Interview 4 Interview 5

R1 R2 Interact, PBI ST

Cog Inq HPS

Interview 3 Interview 4 Interview 5

e,f d,e,f g

Figure 1. Prole of Walts beliefs about teaching and learning and sequence of courses.

Noelles beliefs about teaching a. What is your role as teacher? b. How do you decide what to teach? c. When do you move on to a new topic?

Noelles beliefs about learning d. How do you maximize student learning? e. How do you know when students understand? f. How do students learn science best? g. How do you know learning is occurring in the classroom?
Te acher-centered------------------Student-centered Trad Inst Trans Resp RBased Interview 1 Interview 2

Noelle's courses completed at time of interview R1- recruitment 1 Cog - Cognition Inq- Inquiry research R2- recruitment 2 Interact- Interactions methods PBI project-based Inst HPS Hist/Phil Sci ST Student teaching
Courses completed with FE Interview 1 Courses completed without FE

Teacher-centere d-----------------Student-centered Trad Inst Trans Resp RBased Interview 1 Interview 2 Interview 3 Interview 4 Interview 5

a a,b,c a b,c

e,f,g d,f,g e e,d,f g e e

Interview 2 Interview 3 Interview 4 Interview 5

R1,R2 Interact

Cog

Interview 3 Interview 4 Interview 5

b,c b,c

a a

g g f

d,f d

Inq, HPS PBI, ST

Figure 2. Prole of Noelles beliefs about teaching and learning and sequence of courses.

Individual time-ordered displays were created for each participant (see Miles & Huberman, 1994), which described the teachers progression of beliefs throughout the program and into their rst years in the classroom. See Figures 1 and 2Walts and Noelles individual matricesas examples of these. These individual displays were then synthesized into a rich narrative account of each individuals growth through the program as well as an accompanying pictorial account following Yin (2004). Salient areas of this narrative included the participants personal and professional backgrounds, evolution of beliefs about both teaching and learning over time, development of an inquiry-based practice in the eld, and inuence of outside factors (school, personal, and university-related) on professional growth throughout the program and in the classroom. After creating the cases, we met regularly to identify and explore emergent themes from the collected data among all participants (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). From these sessions and multiple readings of the transcribed interviews, themes were developed from a combination of factors including the direct meaning derived from the comments of the participants, as well as our own orientation and knowledge of the eld and experience in the program. At this time, a time ordered metamatrix, as dened by Miles and Huberman (1994), was also created to help illustrate the development of beliefs among the teachers and to highlight general trends that related to the program. From this meta-matrix and our inductive analysis of the transcripts, the themes from the different cases were identied and developed. Ultimately, the development of the cases and themes provided important information that helped to answer our rst and second research questions.
Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS FINDINGS

13

In this section, we will present the themes from the cross-case construction and the meta-matrix. These themes relate to the questions guiding this study.

Theme 1: Beliefs About Science Teaching Fluctuate Early in the program, participants answers to the questions on the TBI indicated conceptions about teaching that were distributed from the traditional to transitional categories, with an emphasis on instructional answers. When asked about choosing instructional topics, for example, the common response from participants centered on following the text or state and local curricular guidelines when choosing materials, rather than focusing on student interests or constructing a range of objectives after probing for prior knowledge in students. For example, Noelles beliefs about what to teach during this phase were based on the standards and textbook contents and reected an awareness of her novice status when thinking about these questions. Figures 1 and 2 show collected data for Noelle and Walt in a matrix format. The questions about beliefs were coded and then placed in the appropriate category for each interview. Then the completed program coursework sequence was placed in another column to compare how beliefs and eld experiences relate.
I. How will you decide what to teach? N. You mean the topics? Doesnt the district have those IPGs [instructional planning guides]? So Id pretty much follow those. I mean of course I would want to teach what is relevant. But, I. . . I havent really learned this yet. Thats kind of scary. I took all those classes at State University and I really didnt learn what to teach. I. How about in an ideal situation? N. (Laughs) I dont know. Its bad, but Id follow the textbook guidelines and then modify that to make it more interesting. (Laughs) I dont know. (Interview 1)

Similarly, the following example demonstrates that Jan held more traditional ideas about what drives the curriculum.
I. How will you decide to move on to a new topic in your classroom? J. Probably by the textbook chapters. When I learned well was when we nished a chapter in the textbook and then did a few explorations at the end. (Interview 1)

The artifacts collected from participants who had just entered the program tended to conrm their TBI statements. For example, Chris completed a concept map for one course that outlined his understanding of knowing and learning in science education. In this diagram, which is Figure 3, Chris creates a hierarchy with the terms basic ideas, repetition, and examples to express his thoughts on how students know and learn in science. From his initial beliefs interview, Chris echoes this perspective when asked how hell decide what to teach in the classroom:
I. How will you decide what to teach and what not to teach in the classroom? C. Ideally, each kid would be taught on their own based on their prior experience. Curriculum is set to each student. Basics are important because you cant make the connections to the more complicated things without them. (Interview 1)

Science Education

14

FLETCHER AND LUFT

Figure 3. Chriss concept map.

However, as the participants progressed through the program, their coded responses concerning beliefs about teaching shifted toward a reform-based perspective. Jans orientation toward her beliefs continued to align with her own experiences as a student, but included a greater focus on respect as an essential part of classroom instruction. This new focal area shifted her answers to a more transitional perspective that included the ideas and perspectives of the students in her class. Artifacts from this phase of the study also show that participants are shifting to a more reform-based framework with their beliefs about teaching. When asked to reect on his conception of a science teacher from the beginning to the end of the semester for teacher student interactions, Walt says,
I have things I want my students to see in the way I approach teaching science. Inquiry lies within this area as a tool for learning how to think scientically. My initial thoughts on this included hypothesis, analysis etc. but they have been renamed to t the science as inquiry model which I had not fully thought through at the beginning of the semester. (Artifact 01)

By the nal phase of the study when the teachers were in the classroom, the data show that the study participants had sharply returned to a traditional perspective concerning their beliefs about teaching. Responses centered on following district and state testing calendars,
Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS

15

and reected the tension between the theories presented in the preparation program with the realities of teaching in the classroom. Noelle typies the responses of participants at this time with this response:

I. How do you decide to move on to a new topic in the classroom? N. I have general guidelines and curriculum, but I have to stick with other teachers pace. Sometimes they have to move on, and then they get a past topic and our pacing is off. I also use formal/informal observations and quizzes to see if they understand it. If the content isnt a big deal for the state test, then I just move on regardless of their understanding. (Interview 5)

Theme 2: Beliefs About How Children Learn Science Are More Consistent Compared to the responses for the beliefs about teaching, the initial replies from participants concerning their beliefs about learning were clustered in a more transitional frame. These responses were based from the teachers views, but they also included student perspectives into how students learn science. Walt typies the common transitional response that focuses on the affective component of the students understanding in the classroom.

I. How will you know when students understand in the science classroom? W. You know they get it when their comfort level goes up, and you can see them make connections between topics. When they can explain it back to me, I know they get it, in a deeper level hopefully, not just memorizing it and spitting it back. It comes back to comfort level. (Interview 1)

Artifacts from Walt at this time echo another transitional perspectiveone that acknowledges the relationship between student and teacher. In this instance, Walt recognizes that his students are having problems with the material, but his only solution consists of restructuring the assignment.

No matter how much I thought we had simplied directions, I was surprised at how many students got them wrong. My overall impression at the end was that this is like herding cats. We want to keep the lab from being a cookbook exercise, but if you dont go over everything step by step, the kids get lost. Im sure there is a happy medium in there somewhere. Perhaps Ill nd it before I graduate. (Walt, Artifact 01, F03)

This orientation didnt change during the coursework phase. The coded responses continued to be grounded in the teachers voice, but include references to the students perspective. In this phase, the preservice teachers frequently used descriptive language to explain how their pupils would demonstrate learning and understanding of a science topic. Common phrases included you can just tell by the look in their eyes that they get it and you can see the light bulb go on when they understand. For example, when asked to explain how he would understand when a child understood in science, Hal provided the following subjective characterization:
Science Education

16

FLETCHER AND LUFT

I. How do you know when a student understands in science? H. With some its a light bulb and with some its a subtle change. You can hear them be able to discuss it uently. Also when they can connect two points and make a connection between different parts. (Interview 3)

By the time the participants had entered the classroom, some of their views on how students learn science had drifted toward a more teacher-centered focus, although the majority of responses continued to be coded as transitional. In some cases, the participants continued to rely on subjective indicators from their pupils (e.g., body language, facial expressions, etc.) to determine whether learning was occurring, whereas others began to rely more on assessment and student feedback during discussion. Noelle is a good example of the latter:
I. How do you know when students have learned in science? N. When they are doing well on practice problems, homework, and assessments. If they can do what I ask them to do and if they are asking questions. (Interview 5)

Theme 3: Fieldwork Impacts Beliefs Differently

Early Fieldwork Provides Positive Experiences with Elementary and Middle-School Children. The teachers in this study were also engaged in coursework that included eld

components. At the inception of the study, the participants were enrolled in one of the two recruitment courses that provided an initial foray into elementary and middle-school science classrooms. These initial eld experiences were clearly deemed important by the participants as they began to see how excited students were to explore science concepts. For instance, after an elementary-level lesson on the properties of water, Jan remarked, The kids loved the wax paper. It was a bilingual classroom and one of the girls came up and said, Could I have a piece of that paper so I can show my mom? And that made me feel really good, that they had such a good time (Interview 2). Interview data indicated that Walt also enjoyed practical eld experiences. When asked about important events or activities that contributed to his growth as a teacher, Walt remarked, Any classes with eld components are good (Interview 3). He appeared to act on this belief by spending as much time as possible in the classrooms of middle-school teachers before student teaching through a program-developed internship that placed him in a science classroom for at least 20 hours per week during the semester. Additionally, he was paid to work with the students.
Core Fieldwork Is for Building and Supporting Beliefs. By the education coursework

phase of the program, the participants were building beliefs about teaching as they worked in the eld components, and they were able to articulate fairly comprehensive descriptions of how their conceptions of teaching science were aligned with reform-based theories. But these new conceptions werent always practiced in clinical settings. For example, Hal is asked to describe how he will teach science during different eld experiences and he responds:
H. To represent science, you cant start with lecture. You cant lecture until you have an experience or application. You have to have some hands-on application. That way you can actually see the concepts you are learningsee how they applyand then move on. I like an inquiry style of teaching where you are putting information out there, letting them understand it, learn it, and draw conclusions about it. That is the most representative of science to me. (Interview 3)

Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS

17

When attempting to act on these new ideas however, Hal quickly runs into trouble, as evidenced from researchers eld notes taken during one lesson on cell division in a local high school.
As the bell rings Hal immediately begins with a series of questions. So do we know what cancer has to do with mitosis?. . . (silence). . . Anybody?. . . Anybody remember what mitosis is?. . . Come on (exasperated). . . The students are silent. One student tentatively offers an answer that is incorrect. Hal replies No. Mitosis comes afterits part of the cell cycle. The student puts his head down. There was no wait time, no engagement, no attempt to interest or challenge students. Hal acts irritated that they are not engaged with his questions. (RLog 01)

During an observation of a 3-day chemistry lesson that occurred as an early eld experience, the researcher noted that Noelle had a grasp of inquiry-based practices and that she attempted to engage the students with a real-world problem of designing a cold pack for sports medicine. The observation summary reported:
The overall idea was great and once the students were working on the measurements and using the computers/probes, they were engaged. The rst and last day seemed to drag a bit and the students spent a lot of the class period sitting and waiting for one or two people in the group to nish the work (writing hypothetical lab procedures for the investigation and creating a poster describing the lab). The concept was very student-centered, but the practice ended up more teacher-driven because they gave the kids detailed directions and set up the equipment for them. Great promise though. (Artifact 2)

The practical nature of the classroom had inuenced some of Noelles responses to interview questions by the last phase of the study, according to interview data. Most notably, Noelle appeared to have adjusted her former beliefs about how students learn through the realities of the classroom:
I. How do your students learn science best? N. I think by doing it and experiencing it and thinking about it themselves. . . [Sighs]. Ahhh, this is so much theory [laughs]. I can say it and I know it but its so hard to do, and given the time. To get them to actually think about it and do it and talk about it takes time. . . But I think its probably the best, just to experience it and then wonder what they are doing, not just reading about it and not having a clue. (Noelle Interview 5, 37.56)

The First Year of Teaching Results in More Traditional Beliefs. Despite the strong

reform focus and consistent inquiry-based framework of the program, most participants had reverted to a more traditional perspective once in the classroom. For example, Jan was asked to reect on her preparation and if she used inquiry-based instruction in her rst-year classroom.
I. Are you doing any inquiry labs? J. They are guided labs. I felt like inquiry was uffy when I learned it. I dont know that it applies that well to my teaching method. It may work for others, but Im not so sure for me. I think inquiry is a good theory, but not practical. I. What are the constraints to inquiry for you? J. Time. You have to cover so much and inquiry takes so long. You only have so many days and you have to cover everything for the testing world. Test taking is a hard thing to overcome and inquiry doesnt prepare you for that.

Science Education

18

FLETCHER AND LUFT

I. Inquiry was kind of a push from [the program], wasnt it? J. Yes, and I havent written a 5E lesson plan since then. In student teaching I just wrote outlines and went with it. Now, with my Pre-AP kids, its just, OK, heres what we are going to learn today. We have 30 min to get through this. We cant stop and talk about it because theyll lose focus. (Interview 5)

From researcher notes taken while observing Noelle during her rst year as a teacher, there is further evidence of a return to more teacher-centered practice about teaching. The following excerpt is from Noelles class during a chemistry class that was performing a basic titration lab:
So this seems like a very traditional lab-verication type. She has great control over the class, has got the procedures down, seems well organized, but I am not seeing the inquiry piece at all. Posters on the wall speak to fairness, trustworthiness, responsibility etc., but nothing about science content. This is a real shift back to a teacher-centered orientation for Noelle, who was so student-centered last year. (RLog01)

Theme 4: Even With Field Experiences, Beliefs Are Individually Constructed As the preservice teachers engaged in the eldwork associated with the program, their different experiences within each course impacted their beliefs in different ways. Noelle, for example, rened her beliefs toward more reform-based ideals during the teacherstudent interactions course. For Noelle, this eld experience really provided her with the opportunity to practice reform-based teaching. During this period of time, she was beginning to feel condent in using this approach but had concerns about her future responsibilities as a teacher.
I. What stands out from your coursework this semester? N. The teacherstudents interactions course was good. I liked the practical side of it. It was structured so we could follow it. I just dont know how schools give you the time to think though. I like it all but I am scared. Ive talked to a lot of student teachers and graduates who say they dont use 5E or inquiry. They may write it up but it ends up being straight lecture. Im going into it with the idea that I still want to teach in that way though. I think it really prepares me for teaching, helps me lay it out step by step. Im still scared though (laughs). (Interview 3)

Jans beliefs, on the other hand, were not impacted during this course. Jans university instructor for the class used the eld experience as a tool for data collection on assessment, rather than as a developmental tool for building reform-based instructional knowledge and skills. Jan found the focus on the collection of student data to be tedious and unrelated to her development as a teacher. She was also frustrated with the focus on assessment. She shares this in an interview:
I. So what was the teacherstudent interactions course like? J. I got a little frustrated with having to look at the data all the time; I wished that we had had some more teaching instruction. It felt like all we did was collect data for the professors research. We did teach in the eld, but the focus was on pre- and posttests and assessment skills, not practicing how to teach. . . so. . . I. How did that help you as a teacher? J. Umm. . . It will be good when I give a test I guess, but I didnt really learn much from it. (Interview 4)

Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS

19

For Walt, the eld experiences in the program refocused his beliefs. Prior to the eld experiences, Walts beliefs about learning science were transitional to reformed-based. After taking the teacherstudent interactions and PBI courses, both with intensive eld components, his beliefs about his role and what to teach reect a shift toward a more traditional perspective. For Walt, the realities of the classroom challenged the tentative beliefs that he formed from the supporting cognition and recruitment courses. Walt shows this shift when asked, What is your role as the science teacher? In early interview, he answers I am the guy that can lead you along the path to the answers (Interview 3). When asked the same question a year later he remarks, My role is to structure the activity so that they will remember things later on, as well as be the expert who has been there. I am there to maintain order, discipline, and to do paperwork (Interview 4). For all of the teachers in this study, the rst year of teaching provided additional experiences that challenged beliefs. For example, Hals beliefs moved toward a more traditional orientation, which he attributed to a shortage of resources in the district. When asked about his use of reform-based teaching in the classroom he says,
I think the program has a strong reform-based focus and that is a wonderful thing to be able to do. I think that my location here has limited my ability to do that though. Our entire budget for the science department is $1000, so that has limited what we have to work with. I cant do as much inquiry as Id like and Im forced to do more lecture than Id like and I dont like that. (Interview 5)

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION This study contributes to our knowledge of early career science teachers. It specically targets teachers beliefs, which play an important role in the early career development of a teacher (Feiman-Nemser, 2001). Researchers (e.g., Jones & Carter, 2007; Richardson, 1996) support the notion that beliefs are foundational to the development of reform-based practices as outlined in the NSES (NRC, 1996). By focusing on the early career phase of science teachersthe years from recruitment through inductionthis study sheds light on the development of beliefs during and after a preservice program. The study contains two questions of interest. The rst question asks, Do the beliefs of early career secondary science teachers about teaching and learning change from their preservice education program through their rst years of teaching? (And if so, how?) The answer to this question is yes, but several important trends are worthy of further discussion here. We started this study by asking ve preservice teachers a number of semistructured interview questions designed to capture their beliefs about becoming science teachers. As the study progressed, the recorded responses fell into two categories, with some important differences. By separating the original pool of questions into those addressing the participants beliefs about teaching in contrast to beliefs about learning science, we found that for our pool of teachers, beliefs about teaching uctuated more than beliefs about learning. From Bryans (2003) work on the dualistic nature of belief systems, we learn that teachers can hold incongruent sets of beliefs and that these beliefs do impact practice. Our ndings support this notion: our teachers have two sets of beliefs that are frequently at odds. One setthe teachers beliefs about teachingtends to uctuate between traditional, transitional, and reform-based orientations, whereas the other setthe teachers beliefs about learningtends to be stable and cluster around transitional responses. One inference we can draw from the results of this study is that the planners and directors of traditional preservice programs need to fully consider how programs are structured to
Science Education

20

FLETCHER AND LUFT

impact beliefs. Some authors suggest that addressing teacher beliefs is more fruitful during the inservice teachers years after the induction period (Jones & Carter, 2007; Richardson, 1996). On the basis of the results of the present study, one might feel compelled to agree with these authors. In the program we observed, the study participants tended to revert to more traditionally held beliefs, despite the strong reform-based mission of the program, the addition of master teachers well versed in executing reform-based instruction to support student practices, and the well-structured progression of eld experiences. We should not, however, discount the importance of addressing the beliefs of new teachers during their preservice years. While the program we studied may have been structured to foster reform-based beliefs about teaching, its designers overlooked the fact that beliefs are individually constructed. Each teacher brings his or her own initial belief structure to a teacher preparation program, and this individual belief structure reacts to outside inuences in different ways. Preservice teachers tend to have more diverse beliefs sets which should be assessed and challenged throughout a preservice program. By paying close attention to teacher beliefs, science teacher educators are moving toward a notion of personalized teacher education. Our second question is more complex: How do eld experiences that emphasize reformbased science teaching strategies impact the developing beliefs of teachers over the length of their preservice program and their rst year of teaching? In this study, certain aspects of the preservice program seem to impact teacher beliefs in different ways. For instance, early recruitment courses did allow teachers to experience the excitement of teaching. For our teachers, this experience was important in initiating or supporting some preliminary ideas about teaching. The core sequence, however, proved to play a more signicant role in the development of beliefs. It was in these courses, with associated eld experiences or not, that the teachers started to form their beliefs. These beliefs uctuated depending upon the level of practical eld experience of the teacher as well as the focus of instructor for the course. In some instances, eld experiences that were short and closely specied had a signicant impact on a teacher. In other cases, eld experiences structured around longer lessons that were based on a process of problem solving had a signicant impact on a teacher. In both of these instances, when the experience was carefully built to include active reection, reteaching, class discussion, and activities related to the basic tenets of reform-based teaching and learning, beliefs about teaching and learning tended to shift to a reform-based orientation. However, when the course focused on the university instructors research interest or did not have a coherent and practical eld experience that was integrated into the course structure, beliefs did not shift. Clearly, the structure, type, and possibly the sequence of the eld experiences are important in a preservice program. Wilson et al., (2001) are correct when they state that eld experiences are powerful learning opportunities, but these opportunities could do more to foster science teachers beliefs that are consistent with reform-based instruction. More research is certainly needed in order to understand exactly how teacher beliefs are shaped, supported, and strengthened during different types and sequences of eld experiences. The induction years, the rst years in the classroom of an early career teacher, are becoming more important in science teacher education. Feiman-Nemser (2001) recognized the importance of this area in teacher development, and it is evident that during the rst years, beliefs are subject to the contextual side of teaching that is mediated during the preservice program. In other words, the transition into a full-time teaching position brings a whole array of factors that are shielded from the preservice teacher while in the program. Without the strong focus on reform-based instruction, support from university faculty and cooperating teachers, and a clear programmatic focus, many beginning teachers abandon contemporary beliefs when faced with a negative or static school culture, little support
Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS

21

from school leadership for implementing reform-based strategies, and the normal feeling of being overwhelmed with teaching that mostbeginning teachers feel. For the teachers in this study, the rst years of teaching tended to result in movement toward more traditional beliefsthat is, if the teacher had beliefs that were subject to modication. An induction program could have continued the focus on beliefs about teaching and learning science, and might have contributed to the formation of beliefs that align with the reforms in the United States. In summary, we followed ve teachers over 3 years, from recruitment through the teacher education program, and then into their rst teaching position in the school. While there is a growing body of research on beliefs, few studies examine the growth of teachers over more than one semester. In this study, we found that beginning teachers hold a variety of beliefs about teaching and learning in science, and that these beliefs are individual and unique, based on experience, background, and training. Preservice programs that aspire to produce reform-based graduates should be attentive to the individual student, and should provide opportunities for sustained examination and challenge of belief structures. We also determined that early eld experiences, which introduce students to the practical aspects of teaching, could have different levels of impact on student beliefs about teaching and learning. Experiences that are grounded in practice and reection on reform-based instruction can challenge and begin to shift teacher beliefs, but competing factors in the schools can quickly cause the teacher to revert to traditionally held conceptions. This trend has been documented by others before us (see, e.g., Simmons et al., 1999). Our work is important because it is one of the rst studies situated within a disseminated secondary science teacher preparation program, it is longitudinal in nature, and it maps how the beliefs of these teachers relate to course-driven early eld experiences. Bearing in mind that individuals construct their own beliefs, this study reveals how beliefs about teaching and learning uctuated based on the sequence, duration, and focus of early eld practices. Finally, with the caveat that our work is qualitative and not generalizable, we provided some direction for researchers working in this area by suggesting that early eld experiences tied to course goals can help build and support reform-based beliefs. It is important to remember, however, that even with the benet of carefully structured early eld experiences, beginning science teachers may require individualized support from program personnel. NEXT STEPS This study, which focuses on a small group of teachers, reinforces the idea that early career teachers are a group worthy of further observation, and it suggests additional directions for research in the area of beliefs. We share the view of Feiman-Nemser (2001) that teaching is a continuum of learning but recognize a disconnect in this continuum between recruitment, preservice coursework, and induction stages of development. It is important to unify these critical early phases of the teachers development if a seamless continuum of teacher development is desired. More research is needed to describe the interaction of eld experiences at various points in a teachers career, and his or her development of beliefs. Several studies explore the impact of interventions in this area. More could be done to look at the development of beliefs within different program sequences, different qualities of eld experiences, and different intensities of eld experiences. Our research reminds science teacher educators that beliefs are personal constructions, and that teacher preparation programs need to nd new and different ways to monitor and challenge teachers to move toward the formation of reform-based beliefs. In essence,
Science Education

22

FLETCHER AND LUFT

science teacher educators need to be as diligent in monitoring the teaching beliefs of their teachers as they are in monitoring content knowledge or instructional practices. This will be some of the most important work done in the science teacher education community to support the development of early career science teachers.
The authors of this study would like to recognize Brian Fortney, Kurt Oehler, and Michelle Brown for their assistance in the collection of the data. The authors would also like to acknowledge the teachers in this study who enthusiastically participated in the interviews.

REFERENCES
Beach, R., & Pearson, D. (1998). Changes in preservice teachers perceptions of conicts and tensions. Teaching and Teaching Education, 14, 337 349. Beeth, M., & Adadan, E. (2006). The inuences of university-based coursework on eld experience. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(2), 103 120. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (2006). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston Allyn & Bacon. Bryan, L. A. (2003). Nestedness of beliefs: Examining a prospective elementary teachers belief system about science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 835 868. Clift, R., & Brady, P. (2005). Research on methods, courses, and eld experiences. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education (pp. 309 424). Mahwah, NJ: American Educational Research Association and Erlbaum. Crawford, B. A. (1999). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry-based classroom? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(3), 175 194. Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 613 642. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among the ve traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational Research, 38(1), 47 65. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103, 1013 1055. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). Discovery of substantive theory. In W. Filstead (Ed.), Qualitative methodology (pp. 288 297). Chicago: Rand McNally. Haney, J., Czerniak, C., & Lumpe, A. (1996). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation of science education reform strands. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 971 993. Haney, J. J., & McArthur, J. (2002). Four case studies of prospective science teachers beliefs concerning constructivist teaching practices. Science Education, 86, 783 802. Huling, L. (1998). Early eld experiences in teacher education. ERIC Digest, Washington DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED429054). Jones, M. G., & Carter, G. (2007). Science teacher attitudes and beliefs. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1067 1104). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Kang, N. H. (2008). Learning to teach science: Personal epistemologies, teaching goals, and practices of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 478 498. Lemberger, J., Hewson, P. W., & Park H. (1999). Relationships between prospective secondary teachers classroom practice and their conceptions of biology and teaching science. Science Education, 83, 347 371. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Luft, J. A. (2009). Exploring science teacher education: Research in the community. In K. Tobin & W.-M. Roth (Eds.), World of science education: Handbook of research in North America (pp. 547 566). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: SensePublishers. Luft, J. A., Fletcher, S., & Fortney, B. (2005) Recruitment programs: Promising or problematic strategy. Science Educator, 14(1), 41 48. Luft, J. A. & Roehrig, G. (2007). Capturing science teachers epistemological beliefs: The development of the teacher beliefs interview. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 11(2), http://ejse.southwestern .edu/volumes/v11n2/articles/art03 luft.pdf. Mertens, D. M. (1998). Research methods in education and psychology. Integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mewborn, D. (2000). Learning to teach elementary mathematics: Ecological elements of a eld experience. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 3, 27 46.

Science Education

EARLY CAREER SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS

23

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Moore, R. (2003). Reexamining the eld experiences of preservice teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 31 42. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 317 328. Pajares, F. (1992). Teachers beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307 332. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research in teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 102 119). New York Macmillan. Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes, and values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Simmons, P. E., Emroy, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., Crockett, D., et al. (1999). Beginning teachers: Beliefs and classroom actions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 930 954. Stake, R. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443 466). London: Sage. Tigchelaar, A., & Korthagen, F. (2004). Deepening the exchange of student teaching experiences: Implications for the pedagogy of teacher education of recent insights into teacher behaviour. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 665 679. Wallace, C., & Kang, N. (2004). An investigation of experienced secondary science teachers beliefs about inquiry: An examination of competing belief sets. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 936 960. Wideen, M. F., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning-to-teach. Review of Educational Research, 68, 130 178. Wilson, S. M., Floden, R. E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2001). Teacher preparation research: Current knowledge, gaps, and recommendations. Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington. Windschitl, M. (2003). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87, 112 143. Yerrick, R. K., & Hoving, T. J. (2003). One foot on the dock and one foot on the boat: Differences among preservice science teachers interpretations of eld-based science methods in culturally diverse contexts. Science Education, 87, 390 418. Yin, R. K. (2004). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Science Education