Development and Implementation of a Comprehensive Evaluation Model for Science Teacher Preparation Programs

这个项目是亚利桑那大学理学院和教育学院几个系的教员共同努力的结果。这些教师正在为一套新设计的职前教师课程设计形成性评估流程。由于缺乏可用于评估实际教师培训计划有效性的综合模型，因此主要目标是开发这样一个综合的形成性评估模型，通过调整和实施各种评估工具来评估该计划学生学习成果的五个关键方面：(1)概念理解、(2)学科“结构”、(3)教学信念、(4)决策技能、(5)学生在中学教学期间的“专业表现”。这些不同的评估工具和实践来自当前科学教育的研究，以及美国国家科学基金会支持的“卓越教师准备合作”项目最近开展的工作。通过这些活动，项目小组正在(1)组装一套经过测试和可靠的评估工具，将提供给科学和科学教育教师；(2)实施一个持续的评估过程，以提供有关大学水平的科学教育和学科课程的教育实践有效性的信息；(3)报告评估结果，以促进教师对所有学生的主题课程的性质和质量进行分析和反思。未来教师的“概念理解”是通过开发一种工具来衡量的，该工具将利用在Wandersee， Mintzes和Novak，“科学中替代概念的研究”，D. L. Gabel（编），科学教学和学习研究手册（第177-210页），纽约：麦克米伦和NSTA(1994)，以及Pfundt和Duit，“参考书目：《学生的替代框架与科学教育》，德国基尔大学科学教育研究所（2000年3月）。这种仪器的一个非常著名的例子是20世纪80年代由物理学领域的Halloun和Hestenes设计的力概念量表。学生习得的“学科结构”是衡量他们对科学学科理解的连贯性的一种标准——看到大局的能力，以及在更大框架中专业知识体系的地位。研究表明，在“主题结构”方面得分较高的中学科学教师在选择纳入中学科学课程的主题方面具有更高的技能。他们的出发点是G.R. Gess-Newsome和N.G. Lederman的工作，“职前生物教师的知识结构作为专业教师教育的功能：一年的评估，科学教育，第77卷，第1期（1993），第25-45页。”席梦思等人的研究：“初任教师：信念与课堂行动”，《科学教学研究》，第36卷第8期。（1999），第930-954页，正被用来衡量“教学信念”。一些未来的教师仍然认为男孩比女孩更适合理科，认为有些学生注定会失败，认为学习是被动的，认为教学是向学生传授知识，认为理论在很大程度上与教学无关。如果这些信念没有受到挑战，未来的教师没有被教导去批判性地审视自己的想法，无效的教学模式就会延续下去。Koballa和Tippins的工作被用作创建测量“决策技能”的工具的起点。参见T.R. Koballa和D.J. Tippins，“中小学科学教育案例”（Merrill出版社，Upper saddle River， NJ, 2000）。“专业表现”的衡量方法是采用詹姆斯·加拉格尔的《中学教师分析矩阵》（密歇根州立大学，教师教育系，1995年）和亚利桑那州教师“改革后的教学观察协议”的卓越准备合作。

Interdisciplinary (99) This project is a collaborative effort among faculty members in several departments in the College of Science and in the College of Education of the University of Arizona. These faculty are designing a formative assessment process for a set of newly designed courses for pre-service teachers. Because there is a paucity of comprehensive models that can be used to assess the effectiveness of actual teacher preparation programs, the main goal is to develop such a comprehensive formative assessment model, by adapting and implementing diverse assessment instruments to evaluate five key aspects of the program's student learning outcomes: (1) conceptual understanding, (2) subject-matter "structure," (3) teaching and learning beliefs, (4) decision-making skills, and (5) "professional performance" during the student teaching period in secondary schools. These different assessment tools and practices are drawn from current research in science education and from recent work undertaken in NSF-supported projects known as Collaboratives for Excellence in Teacher Preparation. Through these activities the project team is (1) assembling a set of tested and reliable assessment instruments that will be made available to science and science education teachers; (2) implementing an ongoing evaluation process that will provide information about the effectiveness of the educational practices in the science education and subject-matter courses at the college level; and (3) reporting the evaluation results in a way to foster among faculty an analysis of and reflection on the nature and quality of the subject-matter courses for all the students. "Conceptual Understanding" of prospective teachers is being measured by developing an instrument that will draw upon research analyzed in Wandersee, Mintzes, and Novak, "Research in Alternative Conceptions in Science", in D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research in science teaching and learning (pp. 177-210), New York: Macmillan and the NSTA (1994), and Pfundt and Duit, "Bibliography: Students' Alternative Frameworks and Science Education," Institute for Science Education at the University of Kiel, Germany (March, 2000). A very well-known example of such an instrument is the Force Concept Inventory designed by Halloun and Hestenes in the field of physics in the 1980s. The acquired "Subject Matter Structure" of students is a measure of the coherence of their understanding of science disciplines -- the ability to see the big picture and the place of a body of specialized knowledge in that larger framework. Research indicates that secondary science teachers with high scores on "Subject Matter Structure" have greater skill in selecting topics for inclusion in the secondary science curriculum. Their starting point is the work of G.R. Gess-Newsome and N.G. Lederman, "Preservice Biology Teachers' Knowledge Structures as a Function of Professional Teacher Education: A Year-Long Assessment, Science Education, Vol. 77, No. 1 (1993), pages 25-45. The work of Simmons et al., "Beginning Teachers: Beliefs and Classroom Actions," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 36, No. 8. (1999), pp. 930-954, is being adapted to measure "teaching and learning beliefs." Some prospective teachers still believe that boys are better suited for science than girls, that some students are bound to fail, that learning is passive, that teaching is imparting knowledge to students, and that theory is largely not relevant to teaching. If these beliefs go unchallenged and future teachers are not taught to critically examine their own ideas, ineffective models of teaching are perpetuated. The work of Koballa and Tippins is being used as a starting point to creating instruments for measuring "decision making skills." See T.R. Koballa and D.J. Tippins, "Cases in Middle and Secondary Science Education," (Merrill Publishers, Upper saddle River, NJ, 2000). "Professional Performance" is being measured by adapting James Gallagher's Secondary Teacher Analysis Matrix (Michigan State University, Department of Teacher Education, 1995) and the Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in Preparation of Teachers' "Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol."