Profiles of middle school science teachers: Accounting for cognitive and motivational characteristics

Teachers play a critical role in successfully implementing science education reforms in the United States to provide high‐quality science learning opportunities to all students. However, the differentiated ways in which teachers make decisions about their science teaching are not well understood. Th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of research in science teaching 2020-08, Vol.57 (6), p.911-942
Hauptverfasser: Bae, Christine L., Hayes, Kathryn N., DeBusk‐Lane, Morgan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 942
container_issue 6
container_start_page 911
container_title Journal of research in science teaching
container_volume 57
creator Bae, Christine L.
Hayes, Kathryn N.
DeBusk‐Lane, Morgan
description Teachers play a critical role in successfully implementing science education reforms in the United States to provide high‐quality science learning opportunities to all students. However, the differentiated ways in which teachers make decisions about their science teaching are not well understood. This study takes a person‐centered approach by applying latent profile analysis to examine how cognitive (pedagogical content knowledge) and motivational (instructional goal orientations, self‐efficacy beliefs, and reform values) characteristics combine to form science teacher profiles in middle school. Predictors of profile membership (bachelor's degree, school %FRL) and both teacher (science instructional practices) and student (science achievement, engagement, and self‐efficacy) outcomes related to the teacher profiles were also examined. Five science teacher profiles were identified (severely discouraged but reform oriented, discouraged but reform oriented, conventional, confident and mastery oriented, and confident with multiple goal approaches) that represented unique configurations of cognitive and motivation characteristics. Additionally, findings showed that the teacher profiles were significantly related to three dimensions of science instructional practice including communication, discourse, and reasoning. Finally, the teacher profiles were significantly related to student science achievement and motivational outcomes. Implications for differentiated approaches to teacher professional learning and supports for science instruction are discussed.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/tea.21617
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2418964594</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2418964594</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2977-82715ef41036e4602148b227b6f0f0809a165c80b37c358518c4c3d16ddbe3e03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtPwzAQhC0EEqVw4B9Y4sQhrV9xHG5VVR5SJTiUs-U469ZVGhc7BfXfYyhXTrPSfjvaGYRuKZlQQth0ADNhVNLqDI0oqVXBKi7P0SjvWCE4UZfoKqUtIYTXtB4heIvB-Q4SDg7vfNt2gJPdhNBl8dBbwNnSbiCmBzyzNhz6wfdr7ELENqx7P_hPwKZv8S7k0Qw-9KbDdmOisQNEnwZv0zW6cKZLcPOnY_T-uFjNn4vl69PLfLYsLKurqlCsoiU4QQmXICRhVKiGsaqRjjiiSG2oLK0iDa8sL1VJlRWWt1S2bQMcCB-ju5PvPoaPA6RBb8Mh5oeSZoKqWoqyFpm6P1E2hpQiOL2PfmfiUVOif1rUObL-bTGz0xP7lUs6_g_q1WJ2uvgGEetzyg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2418964594</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Profiles of middle school science teachers: Accounting for cognitive and motivational characteristics</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>EBSCOhost Education Source</source><creator>Bae, Christine L. ; Hayes, Kathryn N. ; DeBusk‐Lane, Morgan</creator><creatorcontrib>Bae, Christine L. ; Hayes, Kathryn N. ; DeBusk‐Lane, Morgan</creatorcontrib><description>Teachers play a critical role in successfully implementing science education reforms in the United States to provide high‐quality science learning opportunities to all students. However, the differentiated ways in which teachers make decisions about their science teaching are not well understood. This study takes a person‐centered approach by applying latent profile analysis to examine how cognitive (pedagogical content knowledge) and motivational (instructional goal orientations, self‐efficacy beliefs, and reform values) characteristics combine to form science teacher profiles in middle school. Predictors of profile membership (bachelor's degree, school %FRL) and both teacher (science instructional practices) and student (science achievement, engagement, and self‐efficacy) outcomes related to the teacher profiles were also examined. Five science teacher profiles were identified (severely discouraged but reform oriented, discouraged but reform oriented, conventional, confident and mastery oriented, and confident with multiple goal approaches) that represented unique configurations of cognitive and motivation characteristics. Additionally, findings showed that the teacher profiles were significantly related to three dimensions of science instructional practice including communication, discourse, and reasoning. Finally, the teacher profiles were significantly related to student science achievement and motivational outcomes. Implications for differentiated approaches to teacher professional learning and supports for science instruction are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-4308</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1098-2736</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/tea.21617</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Cognitive style ; Education reform ; Educational Change ; Educational Practices ; Efficacy ; latent profile analysis ; Learning ; Middle schools ; Motivation ; Pedagogical Content Knowledge ; professional development ; Professional Training ; Profiles ; Science Achievement ; Science education ; Science Instruction ; Science teachers ; Student Motivation ; teacher cognition ; teacher motivation and beliefs ; Teachers ; Teaching ; Teaching Methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of research in science teaching, 2020-08, Vol.57 (6), p.911-942</ispartof><rights>2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2977-82715ef41036e4602148b227b6f0f0809a165c80b37c358518c4c3d16ddbe3e03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2977-82715ef41036e4602148b227b6f0f0809a165c80b37c358518c4c3d16ddbe3e03</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3492-7598</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Ftea.21617$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Ftea.21617$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,30999,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bae, Christine L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayes, Kathryn N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeBusk‐Lane, Morgan</creatorcontrib><title>Profiles of middle school science teachers: Accounting for cognitive and motivational characteristics</title><title>Journal of research in science teaching</title><description>Teachers play a critical role in successfully implementing science education reforms in the United States to provide high‐quality science learning opportunities to all students. However, the differentiated ways in which teachers make decisions about their science teaching are not well understood. This study takes a person‐centered approach by applying latent profile analysis to examine how cognitive (pedagogical content knowledge) and motivational (instructional goal orientations, self‐efficacy beliefs, and reform values) characteristics combine to form science teacher profiles in middle school. Predictors of profile membership (bachelor's degree, school %FRL) and both teacher (science instructional practices) and student (science achievement, engagement, and self‐efficacy) outcomes related to the teacher profiles were also examined. Five science teacher profiles were identified (severely discouraged but reform oriented, discouraged but reform oriented, conventional, confident and mastery oriented, and confident with multiple goal approaches) that represented unique configurations of cognitive and motivation characteristics. Additionally, findings showed that the teacher profiles were significantly related to three dimensions of science instructional practice including communication, discourse, and reasoning. Finally, the teacher profiles were significantly related to student science achievement and motivational outcomes. Implications for differentiated approaches to teacher professional learning and supports for science instruction are discussed.</description><subject>Cognitive style</subject><subject>Education reform</subject><subject>Educational Change</subject><subject>Educational Practices</subject><subject>Efficacy</subject><subject>latent profile analysis</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Middle schools</subject><subject>Motivation</subject><subject>Pedagogical Content Knowledge</subject><subject>professional development</subject><subject>Professional Training</subject><subject>Profiles</subject><subject>Science Achievement</subject><subject>Science education</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>Science teachers</subject><subject>Student Motivation</subject><subject>teacher cognition</subject><subject>teacher motivation and beliefs</subject><subject>Teachers</subject><subject>Teaching</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><issn>0022-4308</issn><issn>1098-2736</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kEtPwzAQhC0EEqVw4B9Y4sQhrV9xHG5VVR5SJTiUs-U469ZVGhc7BfXfYyhXTrPSfjvaGYRuKZlQQth0ADNhVNLqDI0oqVXBKi7P0SjvWCE4UZfoKqUtIYTXtB4heIvB-Q4SDg7vfNt2gJPdhNBl8dBbwNnSbiCmBzyzNhz6wfdr7ELENqx7P_hPwKZv8S7k0Qw-9KbDdmOisQNEnwZv0zW6cKZLcPOnY_T-uFjNn4vl69PLfLYsLKurqlCsoiU4QQmXICRhVKiGsaqRjjiiSG2oLK0iDa8sL1VJlRWWt1S2bQMcCB-ju5PvPoaPA6RBb8Mh5oeSZoKqWoqyFpm6P1E2hpQiOL2PfmfiUVOif1rUObL-bTGz0xP7lUs6_g_q1WJ2uvgGEetzyg</recordid><startdate>202008</startdate><enddate>202008</enddate><creator>Bae, Christine L.</creator><creator>Hayes, Kathryn N.</creator><creator>DeBusk‐Lane, Morgan</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3492-7598</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202008</creationdate><title>Profiles of middle school science teachers: Accounting for cognitive and motivational characteristics</title><author>Bae, Christine L. ; Hayes, Kathryn N. ; DeBusk‐Lane, Morgan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2977-82715ef41036e4602148b227b6f0f0809a165c80b37c358518c4c3d16ddbe3e03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Cognitive style</topic><topic>Education reform</topic><topic>Educational Change</topic><topic>Educational Practices</topic><topic>Efficacy</topic><topic>latent profile analysis</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Middle schools</topic><topic>Motivation</topic><topic>Pedagogical Content Knowledge</topic><topic>professional development</topic><topic>Professional Training</topic><topic>Profiles</topic><topic>Science Achievement</topic><topic>Science education</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>Science teachers</topic><topic>Student Motivation</topic><topic>teacher cognition</topic><topic>teacher motivation and beliefs</topic><topic>Teachers</topic><topic>Teaching</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bae, Christine L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayes, Kathryn N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeBusk‐Lane, Morgan</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><jtitle>Journal of research in science teaching</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bae, Christine L.</au><au>Hayes, Kathryn N.</au><au>DeBusk‐Lane, Morgan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Profiles of middle school science teachers: Accounting for cognitive and motivational characteristics</atitle><jtitle>Journal of research in science teaching</jtitle><date>2020-08</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>911</spage><epage>942</epage><pages>911-942</pages><issn>0022-4308</issn><eissn>1098-2736</eissn><abstract>Teachers play a critical role in successfully implementing science education reforms in the United States to provide high‐quality science learning opportunities to all students. However, the differentiated ways in which teachers make decisions about their science teaching are not well understood. This study takes a person‐centered approach by applying latent profile analysis to examine how cognitive (pedagogical content knowledge) and motivational (instructional goal orientations, self‐efficacy beliefs, and reform values) characteristics combine to form science teacher profiles in middle school. Predictors of profile membership (bachelor's degree, school %FRL) and both teacher (science instructional practices) and student (science achievement, engagement, and self‐efficacy) outcomes related to the teacher profiles were also examined. Five science teacher profiles were identified (severely discouraged but reform oriented, discouraged but reform oriented, conventional, confident and mastery oriented, and confident with multiple goal approaches) that represented unique configurations of cognitive and motivation characteristics. Additionally, findings showed that the teacher profiles were significantly related to three dimensions of science instructional practice including communication, discourse, and reasoning. Finally, the teacher profiles were significantly related to student science achievement and motivational outcomes. Implications for differentiated approaches to teacher professional learning and supports for science instruction are discussed.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/tea.21617</doi><tpages>32</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3492-7598</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-4308
ispartof Journal of research in science teaching, 2020-08, Vol.57 (6), p.911-942
issn 0022-4308
1098-2736
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2418964594
source Wiley Journals; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); EBSCOhost Education Source
subjects Cognitive style
Education reform
Educational Change
Educational Practices
Efficacy
latent profile analysis
Learning
Middle schools
Motivation
Pedagogical Content Knowledge
professional development
Professional Training
Profiles
Science Achievement
Science education
Science Instruction
Science teachers
Student Motivation
teacher cognition
teacher motivation and beliefs
Teachers
Teaching
Teaching Methods
title Profiles of middle school science teachers: Accounting for cognitive and motivational characteristics
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T10%3A21%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Profiles%20of%20middle%20school%20science%20teachers:%20Accounting%20for%20cognitive%20and%20motivational%20characteristics&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20research%20in%20science%20teaching&rft.au=Bae,%20Christine%20L.&rft.date=2020-08&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=911&rft.epage=942&rft.pages=911-942&rft.issn=0022-4308&rft.eissn=1098-2736&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/tea.21617&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2418964594%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2418964594&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true