Mixed-methods analysis of science teacher educator professional development: a five-year longitudinal study

ABSTRACT

This investigation explored a learning community approach to professional development (PD) specifically catered to science teacher educators. It was designed to bolster faculty collaboration, help participants learn about new research relevant to teacher development, and share effective teaching strategies. Forty-four science teacher educators attended across five years of implementation. Data included Likert-scale and open-ended survey responses, field notes of PD observations, artefacts, and interviews. These data were analysed using a concurrent transformative mixed-methods approach with regard to PD objectives and to gain insight into participants’ perceptions about strengths and areas for improvement of the programme. Paired sample t tests measured pre- and post-PD scores as well as at a one-year-delayed post-time interval on a range of constructs (i.e. nature of science, problem-based learning, and inquiry instruction). The analysis indicated statistically significant gains across all measured constructs for post-PD scores and the majority of gains were maintained after one year. Participants perceived the PD as an important experience that affected their effectiveness as science teacher educators. Collaboration with colleagues was perceived to be an especially valuable part of the experience. Overall, the programme engaged participants as active learners, promoted collaboration, aligning with broader state science education initiatives.

KEYWORDS:

• Faculty professional development
• science teacher educators
• inquiry
• problem-based learning
• nature of science
• vexations and ventures

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by funding from the U.S. Department of Education Investing in Innovation (i3) grant programme. However, the results presented here do not necessarily represent the policy of the U.S. Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal government.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Education.