Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strengthening Elementary Preservice Teachers’ Physical Science Content Knowledge: a 3-Year Study

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated how an intervention consisting of a series of physical science lessons embedded within the elementary science methods course impacted elementary preservice teachers’ (N = 473) science content knowledge as evidenced in their scaled scores for the science content component of a standardized subject certification examinations for elementary teachers (TExES Core Subjects EC-6, Science (804) exam). The science content component of the certification exam was the instrument used to generate data for this study. The independent variables for this study were the timing of the exam attempt compared to the participation in the science intervention. The dependent variables included the scaled score for the exam and the science content competencies. Results for an independent sample t-test indicated that the difference between the mean scores for these two groups was statistically significant (t =  − 4.21, df = 102, p < .001) with the preintervention group scoring lower compared to the postintervention group. Mean scores for the exam were higher (MS = 57.7%, SD = 29.8%) than the mean score for exam attempts occurring before the intervention (MS = 44.4%, SD = 29.2%). The results suggest that the intervention implemented as part of the science methods course had a positive impact on prospective teachers. That is, their science content knowledge resulted in an increased passing rate on the certification exam.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & McDuffie, A. R. (2006). One course is not enough: Preservice elementary teachers’ retention of improved views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(2), 194–213. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V. L., Pongsanon, K., Rogers, M. A. P., Carter, I., & Galindo, E. (2017). Exploring the use of lesson study to develop elementary preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching nature of science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(2), 293–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9690-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association, APA Task Force on Race and Ethnicity Guidelines in Psychology. (2019). Race and ethnicity guidelines in psychology: Promoting responsiveness and equity. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/about/policy/guidelines-race-ethnicity.pdf

  • Anggoro, A., Widodo, A., & Suhandi, A. (2017). Pre-service elementary teachers understanding of force and motion. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 895.https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/892/1/012151

  • Antink-Meyer, A., & Meyer, D. Z. (2016). Science teachers’ misconceptions in science and engineering distinctions: Reflections on modern research examples. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(6), 625–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, D. L. & McDiarmid, G. W. (1989). The subject matter preparation of teachers. National Center for Research on Teacher Education: Michigan State University. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED310084.pdf

  • Berry, A., Friedrichsen, P., & Loughran, J. (Eds.). (2015). Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchmann, M. (1983). The priority of knowledge and understanding in teaching. Occasional Paper 61. East Lansing Institute for Research on Teaching: National Institute of Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED241494.pdf

  • Buddin, R., & Zamarro, G. (2009). Teacher qualifications and student achievement in urban elementary schools. Journal of Urban Economics, 66(2), 103–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2009.05.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çam, A., Topçu, M. S., & Sülün, Y. (2015). Preservice science teachers’ attitudes towards chemistry and misconceptions about chemical kinetics. Asia - Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 16(2), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, B. S., Maerten-Rivera, J., Rohrer, R. E., & Lee, O. (2014). Effectiveness of a curricular and professional development intervention at improving elementary teachers’ science content knowledge and student achievement outcomes: Year 1 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 635–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feuer, M. J., Floden, R. E., Chudowsky, N. & Ahn, J. (2013). Evaluation of teacher preparation programs: Purposes, methods, & policy options. Report of the National Academy of Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED565694.pdf

  • Forbes, J. L., Sabel, C. T., & Zangori, L. (2015). Promoting prospective elementary teachers’ learning to use formative assessment for life science instruction. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(4), 419–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-015-9431-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK; Results of the thinking from a PCK Summit. In A. Berry, J. Loughran, & P. J. Friedrichsen (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28–42). Routlege.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J., Taylor, J. A., Carlson, A. L., Wilson, C. D., & Stuhlsatz, A. M. (2019). Teacher pedagogical content knowledge, practice, and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 41(7), 944–963. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1265158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanuscin, D., Cisterna, D., & Lipsitz, K. (2018). Elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching structure and properties of matter. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(8), 665–692. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2018.1488486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrell, P. (2009). Do state examinations measure teacher quality? Educational Studies, 35(1), 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690802470274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrell, P., & Subramaniam, K. (2014). A presumption of competence: Elementary pre-service teacher knowledge about dissolving. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 33(3), 283–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrell, P., & Subramaniam, K. (2015). Elementary pre-service teachers’ conceptual understanding of dissolving: A Vygotskian concept development perspective. Research in Science and Technological Education, 33(3), 304–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, S., & Rogers, M. P. (2016). Tools for reflection: Video-based reflection within a preservice community of practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(4), 415–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9468-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiray, S. A., Aktan, F., Kaynar, H., Kilinc, S., & Gorkemli, T. (2015). A descriptive study of pre-service science teachers’ misconceptions about sinking–floating. Asia - Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 16(2), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koc, I., & Yager, R. E. (2016). Preservice teachers’ alternative conceptions in elementary science concepts. Cypriot Journal of Science Education, 11(3), 144–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, K., Schen, M., & Bao, L. (2012). Explicitly targeting preservice teacher scientific reasoning abilities and understanding of nature of science through an introductory science course. Science Educator, 21(2), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. K., & Shea, M. (2016). An analysis of pre-service elementary teachers’ understanding of inquiry-based science teaching. Science Education International, 27(2), 217–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, C. C., & Tsuchida, I. (1999). A lesson is like a swiftly flowing river: How research lesson improve Japanese education. Improving Schools, 2(1), 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/136548029900200117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, C. S. (2019). The effect of science education classes on pre-service elementary teachers’ attitudes about science. Journal of College Science Teaching, 48(6), 77–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, C. S., Harrell, P. E., Pope, E., & Subramaniam, K. (2019). Using microteaching to improve preservice elementary teachers’ physical science content knowledge. The Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, 23(4), 16–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370–391. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menon, D., & Sadler, T. D. (2016). Preservice elementary teachers’ science self-efficacy beliefs and science content knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(6), 649–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9479-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mesci, G., & Schwartz, R. S. (2017). Changing preservice teachers’ views of nature of science: Why some conceptions may be more easily altered than others. Research in Science Education, 47(2), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9503-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moodley, K., & Gaigher, E. (2019). Teaching electric circuits: Teachers’ perceptions and learners’ misconceptions. Research in Science Education, 49(1), 73–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Namdar, B. (2018). Teaching global climate change to pre-service middle school teachers through inquiry activities. Research in Science & Technological Education, 36(4), 440–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1420643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, P. (2008). Teaching for understanding: The complex nature of pedagogical content knowledge in pre-service education. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1281–1299. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802186993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, J. M. (2013). Some challenges in assessment for teacher licensure, program accreditation, and educational reform. The Modern Language Journal, 97(2), 554–560. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43651660

  • Nowicki, B. L., Sullivan-Watts, B., Shim, M. K., Young, B., & Pockalny, R. (2013). Factors influencing science content accuracy in elementary inquiry science lessons. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 1135–1154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9303-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papadouris, N., Hadjigeorgiou, A., & Constantinou, C. P. (2014). Pre-service elementary school teachers’ ability to account for the operation of simple physical systems using the energy conservation law. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(8), 911–933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9407-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitjeng-Mosabala, P., & Rollnick, M. (2017). Exploring the development of novice unqualified graduate teachers’ topic-specific PCK in teaching the particulate nature of matter in South Africa’s classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 40, 742–770. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1446569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potvin, P., & Cyr, G. (2017). Toward a durable prevalence of scientific conceptions: Tracking the effects of two interfering misconceptions about buoyancy from preschoolers to science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(9), 1121–1142. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riegle-Crumb, C., Morton, K., Moore, C., Chimonidou, A., Labrake, C., & Kopp, S. (2015). Do inquiring minds have positive attitudes? The science education of preservice elementary teachers: Do inquiring minds have positive attitudes? Science Education, 99(5), 819–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rojas, N. (2018). Education system in US: Nearly 2,400 North Carolina teachers fail math exams, prompting look at tests. Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/education-north-carolina-teachers-fail-math-exams-tests-1054333

  • Sadler, P. M., & Sonnert, G. (2016). Understanding misconceptions: Teaching and learning in middle school Physical Science. American Educator, 40(1), 26–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Coyle, H. P., Cook-Smith, N., & Miller, J. L. (2013). The influence of teachers’ knowledge on student learning in middle school physical science classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 50(5), 1020–1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santu, A. O., Marten-Rivera, J. L., Bovis, S., & Orend, J. (2014). A mile wide or an inch deep? Improving elementary preservice teachers’ science content knowledge within the context of a science methods course. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(8), 953–976. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9402-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1175860

  • Shuls, J. V. (2018). Raising the bar on teacher quality: Assessing the impact of increasing licensure exam cut-scores. Educational Policy, 32(7), 969–992. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904816682315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramaniam, K., & Harrell, P. (2013). Framing prospective elementary teachers’ conceptions of dissolving as a ladder of explanations. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(7), 1177–1199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9356-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramaniam, K., Kirby, B., Harrell, P., & Long, C. (2019). Using concept maps to reveal prospective elementary teachers’ knowledge of buoyancy. Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, 23(2), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subramaniam, K., Harrell, P. E., Long, C. S., & Khan, N. (2022). Pre-service elementary teachers’ conceptual understanding of average speed: The systematicity and persistence of related and unrelated concepts. Research in Science & Technological Education, 40(2), 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Texas Educator Certification Examination Program (2020). Preparation Manual Core Subjects EC-6 (291) http://www.tx.nesinc.com/Content/StudyGuide/TX_SG_obj_291.htm

  • Tobin, K. (2012). Control of teacher certification in the United States. Peabody Journal of Education, 87(4), 485–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2012.705150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. K., & Christopher. (2007). A longitudinal study of conceptual change: Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of moon phases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 303–326. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, C. S., Cosmé, P. X., Dinehart, L., Martí, R., McDonald, D., Ramirez, M., & Zamora, J. (2017). Answering the call: Hispanic-serving institutions as leaders in the quest for access, excellence, and equity in American higher education. Association of Mexican American Educators Journal, 11(3), 251–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victor, E. (1962). Why are our elementary school teachers reluctant to teach science?. Science Education, 46(2), 185–192. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730460231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, P., Bellows, L., Osborne, C., Lincove, J., & Mills, N. (2016). Teacher quality differences between teacher preparation programs: How Big? How reliable? Which programs are different? Economics of Education Review, 53, 31–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L. (2002). Dancing with maggots and saints: Visions for subject matter knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge in science teacher education reform. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015129825891

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA

    Christopher Sean Long, Pamela Harrell, Karthigeyan Subramaniam, Elizabeth Pope & Ruthanne Thompson

Authors
  1. Christopher Sean Long
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pamela Harrell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karthigeyan Subramaniam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elizabeth Pope
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ruthanne Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher Sean Long.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

The University of North Texas Institutional Review Board has reviewed and approved the research. The approval number/ID is Human Subjects Application No. IRB-19–531.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A Peer Evaluation Rubric

Appendix A Peer Evaluation Rubric

Criterion

Absent (0)

Unsatisfactory (1)

Developing (2)

Target (3)

Exemplary (4)

Outstanding (5)

Ideas and indicators

Big idea, TEKS, learning objectives, language objectives, or align lesson with TEKS is missing

Missing three or more of the following components: “big idea” display of TEKS, learning objectives, language objectives, and alignment of lesson with TEKS.

Missing two of the following components: big idea” display of TEKS, learning objectives, language objectives, and alignment of lesson with TEKS.

Missing one of the following components: big idea” display of TEKS, learning objectives, language objectives, and alignment of lesson with TEKS.

Identifies big idea” display of TEKS, learning objectives, language objectives, and lesson is aligned with TEKS.

TEKS is aligned with instructional strategies and assessments (diagnostic, formative and summative).

Safety Rules and Regulations

Safety Rules and Regulations are missing.

Includes and lists Safety Rules and Regulations but are inappropriate.

Includes and lists Safety Rules and Regulations when and/or where appropriate within the 5 phases but does not describe and explain Safety Rules and Regulations.

Includes, lists and describes Safety Rules and Regulations when and/or where appropriate within the 5 phases but does not explain Safety Rules and Regulations.

Includes, lists, describes and explains Safety Rules and Regulations when and/or where appropriate within the 5 phases.

Safety Rules and Regulations are grade and content appropriate.

Engage

Engage is missing.

Missing three or more of the following components: captures students’ attention (e.g., discrepant events or questions); assesses prior knowledge and misconceptions; and connects to appropriate Explore student activities.

Missing two of the following components: captures students’ attention (e.g., discrepant events or questions); assesses prior knowledge and misconceptions; and connects to appropriate Explore student activities.

Missing two of the following components: captures students’ attention (e.g., discrepant events or questions); assesses prior knowledge and misconceptions; and connects to appropriate Explore student activities.

Addresses all components: captures students’ attention (e.g., discrepant events or questions); assesses prior knowledge and misconceptions; and connects to appropriate Explore student activities.

Addresses all components and displays differentiated strategies to appropriate Explore student activities.

Explore

Explore is missing.

Uses direct concrete experience with the concept Missing three or more of the following components: student centered, teacher acts as a guide, lesson involves a least 50% student interaction, Explore includes enough explanation (e.g., worksheet, lab) to enable students to navigate the Explore independently, lesson is inquiry based and includes pre-instructional and probing questions.

Uses direct concrete experience with the concept Missing two of the following components: student centered, teacher acts as a guide, lesson involves a least 50% student interaction, Explore includes enough explanation (eg., worksheet, lab) to enable students to navigate the Explore independently, lesson is inquiry based and includes pre-instructional and probing questions.

Uses direct concrete experience with the concept Missing two of the following components: student centered, teacher acts as a guide, lesson involves a least 50% student interaction, Explore includes enough explanation (e.g., worksheet, lab) to enable students to navigate the Explore independently, lesson is inquiry based and includes pre-instructional and probing questions.

Addresses all component: student centered, teacher as guide, interactive, Explore includes enough explanation (e.g., worksheet, lab) to enable students to navigate the Explore independently, inquiry based including probing questions, direct concrete experience with the concept.

Addresses all component and integrates STEM science practices.

Explain

Explain is missing.

Teacher clarifies information and shares scientific concept. Missing three or more of the following components: information from Explore is analyzed, concept map is appropriate, a list of essential questions with answer key, teacher clarifies information and shares scientific concept, teacher listens critically to explanation from students, and teacher uses recorded observations from students during explanation.

Teacher clarifies information and shares scientific concept. Missing two of the following components: information from Explore is analyzed, concept map is appropriate, a list of essential questions with answer key, teacher clarifies information and shares scientific concept, teacher listens critically to explanation from students, and teacher uses recorded observations from students during explanation.

Students explain concept using Explore and teacher and students interact during the Explain. Missing one of the following components: information from Explore is analyzed, concept map is appropriate, a list of essential questions with answer key, teacher clarifies information and shares scientific concept, teacher listens critically to explanation from students, and teacher uses recorded observations from students during explanation.

Addresses all components: students explain concept using Explore, teacher and students interact during Explain, information from Explore is analyzed, concept map is appropriate, a list of essential questions with answer key, teacher clarifies information and shares scientific concept, teacher listens critically to explanation from students, and teacher uses recorded observations from students during explanation.

Addresses all components and uses both Student Explain and Teacher Explain to enable students’ construction of science content.

Elaborate

Elaborate is missing.

Missing three or more of the following components: student centered, activities or deepen understanding OR apply concept to a real world situation.

Missing two of the following components: student centered, activities or deepen understanding OR apply concept to a real world situation.

Missing one of the following components: student centered, activities or deepen understanding OR apply concept to a real world situation.

Addresses all components: student centered, activities or deepen understanding OR apply concept to a real world situation.

Addresses all components and uses Elaborate strategies to enable students’ construction of science content.

Evaluate

Evaluate is missing.

Missing three or more of the following components: Appropriate preplanned assessment with answer key is used (i.e., diagnostic and formative assessment). Teacher adjusts instruction for student learning and concept development, students reflect on learning at least twice during the lesson.

Missing two of the following components: Appropriate preplanned assessment with answer key is used (ie., diagnostic and formative assessment). Teacher adjusts instruction for student learning and concept development, students reflect on learning at least twice during the lesson.

Missing one of the following components: Appropriate preplanned assessment with answer key is used (i.e., diagnostic and formative assessment). Teacher adjusts instruction for student learning and concept development, students reflect on learning at least twice during the lesson.

Appropriate preplanned assessment with answer key is used (i.e., diagnostic and formative assessment). Teacher adjusts instruction for student learning and concept development, students reflect on learning at least twice during the lesson.

Appropriate preplanned assessments are differentiated to enable students’ construction of science content.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Long, C.S., Harrell, P., Subramaniam, K. et al. Strengthening Elementary Preservice Teachers’ Physical Science Content Knowledge: a 3-Year Study. Res Sci Educ 53, 613–632 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-022-10071-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-022-10071-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation