Changes in Student Attitudes Regarding Science When Taught by Teachers Without Experiences With a Model Professional Development Program

Changes in Student Attitudes Regarding Science When Taught byTeachers Without Experiences With a Model Professional

Development Program

Mohamed Moustafa AliAlexandria University

Robert YagerUniversity of Iowa

Esme HacieminogluNecmettin Erbakan University

Ilke CaliskanHacettepe University

This study focuses on two main issues concerning changes in student attitudes toward science study and theirperceptions of its usefulness in their lives. Information has been gathered concerning how student attitudes towardscience have changed for teachers and schools not involved with any funded professional development project.Pretesting and posttesting were administered with such “control” groups at the same intervals corresponding with thedata collected from students with teachers enrolled in five funded Professional Development projects over the 1981–2008 interim. The grade levels used by the National Assessment of Education Progress in their 1977 assessment ofscience were used; it focused on students in grades 3, 7, and 11. The results indicate a steady decline in student positiveattitudes concerning their science study as grade levels increase. Conversely, the student perceptions of the usefulnessof their science study as related to daily living, further science study, and for potential careers remained much the sameover the 30-year interim is a second focus. Generally, results indicate that traditional teaching and major use oftextbooks cause increasingly negative student attitudes about science while not producing major changes in theirperceptions of its usefulness in their lives.

In 1977, the National Assessment of EducationalProgress (NAEP) in the United States included a newfeature in its science assessments that included a look atstudent affective outcomes. Science has been the majorfocus for NAEP assessments periodically over the lastthree decades. There has been a continued interest inchanges in student attitudes about classes, teachers, andcareers as well as their perceptions of the usefulness ofschool science in their lives. These efforts were usually anadded feature to more typical assessments of the masteryof science concepts, which characterize traditional scienceclassrooms, and which define most science courses inmost schools.

The affective domain results were quite shocking whenincluded as a part of the Project Synthesis final report,which was published by the National Science TeachersAssociation (NSTA) in its “What Research Says to theScience Teacher” series (Harms & Yager, 1981).

It is shocking to find that the longer typical science isoffered, the worse attitudes are found. Researchers con-tinue to find negative outcomes unless the negative find-ings are corrected. Basically, students must be moreinvolved in actually doing science, which starts with per-sonal questions—not the next chapter in a textbook.Regardless of reform efforts, negative attitudes remain.

Differences are found when teachers involve studentsmore directly.

Review of Related ResearchSeveral studies have included many of the same items

from NAEP as studies of the successes of the NationalScience Foundation (NSF) curriculum efforts over the lastthree decades were undertaken. Many of these efforts fre-quently involved teachers in professional developmentefforts designed to improve student performances regard-ing traditional science content. When student attitudesimproved, students have been found to be more positive(George, 2006; Osborne, Simon, & Collins, 2003).

In typical settings for science classes are students seenas sitting and listening, watching demonstrations, andtaking notes. Brooks and Brooks (1999) have reported thattypical students indicate what is lacking in traditionalscience classrooms. From their report, the followingresults are: (a) the curriculum is experienced largely as anemphasis on basic skills, (b) strict adherence to a fixedcurriculum is valued highly, (c) curricular activities relyheavily on textbooks and workbooks, (d) students areviewed as “blank slates” onto which information is etchedby the teacher, (e) teachers generally behave in a didacticmanner, disseminating information to students, (f)

School Science and Mathematics 109

teachers seek the correct answers to validate student learn-ing, (g) assessments of student learning are viewed asseparate from teaching and focus almost entirely onformal testing, and (h) students primarily work alone.Brooks and Brooks have further observed that in suchtypical classroom settings, there is little or no attentionpaid to the interests of individual students.

Researchers have generally found that students havemore negative attitudes toward science classes when Pro-fessional Development for teachers is attempted (Blunck,1993; Cho, 2002; Gallagher & Tobin, 1987; Yager &McCormack, 1989; Yager, Simmons, & Penick, 1989;Yutakom, 1997). These studies all report that the morestudents study science in school, the less positive are theirattitudes concerning it, unless specific actions are taken toreverse the situation.

The results of most previous research that have beenreported indicate that positive attitudes toward sciencegenerally decline, while attitudes concerning its useful-ness remain much more stable (Osborne et al., 2003; Schi-beci, 1984). Student perceptions of the usefulness ofscience are related to their enjoyment levels as derived anddefined by its being seen as fun, interesting, and exciting.Similar observations have been reported by other research-ers (Khoury & Voss, 1985). Unless students are able to seethe usefulness of science in their daily lives and for furtherstudy, the chance of their being disinterested in sciencegrows (George, 2000, 2006). Haselhuhn and Andre (1997)have reported that students who perceive science to beuseful are more likely to enroll in additional sciencecourses.

A steady decline in positive student attitudes towardscience study has been reported to worsen as students intypical classrooms progress across all K-12 grade levels. Itis clear that many professional development activitiesrelated to funded special projects reverse the negative out-comes (Binadja, 2012; Blunck & Yager, 1996; Salish IResearch Project, 1997).

New roles for school science were described in therelease of the National Science Education Standards(National Research Council [NRC]) in 1996 in the UnitedStates. Thus, traditional methodologies, where “teacherstell and students remember facts, theories, or procedures”are no longer valued (Lapadat, 2000, p. 1). The results ofmore studies indicate that without meaningful sustainedProfessional Development, student attitudes deteriorateeven further.

Other research indicate successes with developing morepositive attitudes over time following specific ProfessionalDevelopment experiences and in exemplary preparatory

programs (Iowa Utilities Association, 1991; NSF 1987,1995, 2000, 2010; Sadeghpour-Kramer, Dunkhase, Yager,& Tillotson, 2009).

Lester, Garofalo, and Kroll (1989) have argued thatattitudes should be a factor in determining real learning ofschool science as well as important assessment outcomesand as an important indicator of science learning. Studentpositive attitudes have also been reported by others toincrease student achievement in science and produce moreinterest in possible scientific careers (Matson & Parsons,2006; Reiss, 2004; Simpson & Oliver, 1985, 1990). Otherresearch indicate that students who have positive attitudestend to perform better than those who have negative atti-tudes concerning science; students who achieve highlyhave more positive attitudes about science than those whoare low achievers (Beaton et al., 1996).

Haselhuhn and Andre (1997) have reported that studentswho perceive science to be useful are more likely to enrollin additional science courses. Other studies of attitude ofsecondary school students toward science have revealedthat student dislike of science in schools can be corrected(Kuppan, Munirah, Foong, & Yeung, 2009). Studies havealso recently stated and validated that attitudes towardsocioscientific concerns do improve student motivationand interest in science (Topcu, 2010). Another recent studyon the effects of cooperative learning on student achieve-ment and attitude toward science indicates certain strate-gies can provide important facets for improving studentattitudes (Köse, Sahin, Ergü, & Gezer, 2010).

Chautauqua ProgramsThe NSTA efforts in the early 80s included the use of

Chautauqua programs, which were organized and plannedas summer workshops followed by at least two three-daysessions during the following academic school year(October and April). These follow-up sessions were usedto report and analyze specific changes in teaching thatwere advocated and planned during the summer work-shops. Such yearlong efforts illustrate the nature of col-laborative efforts while also providing needed follow-upefforts regarding successes (and failures) of the impact ofa specific Professional Development project, often over anentire school year. Specific changes over the academicyear, which followed a typical Professional Developmentsummer effort, were often quick opinions of participantsafter working with other teachers concerning neededreforms. The Iowa Professional Development used keyTeachers Leaders who had experienced the project suc-cessfully and were pleased to become part of the Profes-sional Development staff; they were major leaders in the

Student Attitudes Regarding Science

110 Volume 113 (3)

whole Chautauqua enterprise concerning efforts over aone- to three-year period of time.

The Chautauqua efforts planned and coordinated byNSTA were modeled after the professional developmentprogram for college science teachers sponsored by theAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science(AAAS, 1990), which were supported with major NSFfunding for more than a decade earlier (late 1960s andthrough the 70s). These AAAS Chautauqua programs forcollege faculty were offered at the Iowa Science EducationCenter for several years as well as later with the NSTAefforts enrolling K-12 teachers. One aspect of the pretest-ing was accomplished at the opening of the October shortcourses; posttesting occurred at the end of the spring shortcourse. These were considered more important than werepremeasures and post-measures used at the opening andclosing of the summer workshops. Nonetheless, most pro-fessional development projects continue to undertakeassessments prior to and immediately following a summerworkshop—and often include no assessments of learnerswho are enrolled in the classrooms of teachers during thefollowing academic years. Current efforts include the col-lection and data a few weeks before the actual meeting ofa professional development sequence.

The grade levels used for collecting the 1977 NAEPdata were students from third, seventh, and eleventh gradesin schools across the United States. The informationgained from the Iowa programs over the 30 years has beenuseful in building and planning new programs for prepar-ing new teachers for elementary, middle, and high schoolsin Iowa. It was natural for teachers prepared at the Uni-versity of Iowa to be leaders in the professional develop-ment activities for all those who were employed asteachers in Iowa schools as the Chautauqua model wasoffered at various sites (as many as five each year) acrossthe state for nearly three decades. The specific features ofIowa Chautauqua are indicated in Figure 1.

Too many assume, as reforms for 2012 are underway,that science teachers who have experienced more study ofbasic science as part of their own preparatory programs arebetter than those who have less. The focus over the past 50years has been to include more college science coursework in programs designed to prepare new science teach-ers. The curriculum materials created were often called“teacher-proof,” emphasizing the old information trans-mission model for learning. Teachers were often taught inthe same way they were taught by college science facultymembers, including a primary focus on the informationfrom textbooks and their lectures. In Iowa, it was deemedimportant for each funded effort to have control group

teachers and schools during the following academic yearin an effort to accumulate more information and actualevidence of the success of the funded projects to reportback to the various funding groups.

Little was done with data from control groups in termsof published research, especially in terms of affective out-comes. This study focuses on how student attitudes andtheir perceived usefulness in the “control” classroomschanged over time. Such data were originally sought pri-marily to indicate what happened in the experimentalclasses following a summer Chautauqua experience andhow it compared with the Chautauqua enrollees whereresults were often very positive. Such models continue tooperate as curriculum frameworks when teachers definethe important information for students, which often indi-cates what was/is included in textbooks. Typically, assess-ments of success have been reported to indicate theaccuracy and completeness of the information taught aspart of the curriculum. The emphasis on a given curricu-lum frequently causes problems for achieving real studentlearning!

When NAEP efforts included the affective indicators,many science teachers dismissed the results clearly, indi-cating that their task was not to improve attitudes but toincrease student understanding (remembering) of the con-cepts comprising the curriculum and which were assessedby the “Standardized” examinations. Most curricula werebased almost wholly on textbooks chosen by the faculty inschools (Blunck &Yager, 1996; Harms, 1977). In 17 statesacross the United States, textbooks continue to be usedonly when “approved” by the State Departments of Edu-cation. Teachers are expected to use such frameworks forcourses they are hired to teach. It was/is a form of controlfor defining classroom content which teachers areexpected to follow. It was up to students to do their best onexaminations that tested what students had studied fromtextbooks and/or what they were told to remember byteachers.

Research Questions for This ReportThis study indicates changes in student “enjoyment” for

studying science as well as indicating differences instudent perceptions of its “usefulness” and how they bothchange from grade three through grade eleven. How theresults in typical schools have varied over the 30 years isthe focus for this report that provides more comprehensiveevidence of the lack of success without the help providedby specific Professional Development efforts.

Again, the purpose of this study was to report onchanges over time for control group teachers, thereby



LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE

A Two-Week-Long Conference Designed To Prepare Teacher Leaders

1. Organizing staff team for conducting a workshop series for 30 new teachers consisting of: a) One lead teacher per ten new teachers b) Scientists from a variety of disciplines c) Scientists from industry d) School administrators e) Science Coordinators as chair of staff teams

2. Organization and scheduling for each workshop 3. Materials for publicity and recruitment 4. Examples of specific assessment strategies: a) Six domains for teaching and assessment foci b) Use of reports and other written material from past years c) New research plans for Teacher Leaders d) Focus on how students use concepts and process skills in new contexts e) Use of videotapes of classrooms

FOUR-WEEK SUMMER WORKSHOP

Experiences that Characterize the Iowa Chautauqua Professional Development Model

Including special activities and field experiences that relate specific content within the disciplines of biology, chemistry, earth science, and physics. Making connections between science, technology, society within the context of real world issues. Examination of societal issues such as air quality, water quality, land use/management that can be used as the context for concept mastery and process skill development Use of personal problems for individual proj ects (related to health, natural hazards, population growth) Every staff member and every teacher participant selects at least one issue/problem and completes at least one Action Research Project regarding it. Plans for continuing Action Research in the classroom over the next academic year. Completion of several videotapes of teaching experiences with both self and group analyses. Organize 3 grade level groups , e.g., K-5, 6-8, & 9-12 (with up to 10 in each group) for continuing collaboration.

ACADEMIC YEAR SHORT COURSE SERIES Fall Short Course Interim Projects Spring Short Course (3 days) (3 days)

Awareness Workshop Three Month Interim Project Final Workshop

20 hr Instructional Block(Thursday pm. Friday, & Saturday)

Plan for 3-5 Week Module 20 hr Instructional Block(Thursday pm. Friday, & Saturday)

Activities Include: 1. Review problems with traditional

views of science and science teaching 2. Outline specific features of the More

Emphasis features from the NSES in a science context in terms as grade level, curriculum frameworks, and the school community

3. Define techniques for developing 3-4 week modules and assessing their effectiveness in teaching

4. Select tentative module topics 5. Practice with specific assessment tools

in each of the six Domains. 6. Use “Lesson Study” designs 7. Analyze one videotape involving a

teacher volunteer with each grade level group to be shared

Activities Include: 1. Developing instructional plan for

minimum of twenty days 2. Administer pretests in six domains 3. Teach module development to

illustrate the reforms featured in the NSES

4. Collect posttest information 5. Communicate with regional staff,

other Lead Teachers, and central Chautauqua staff

6. Complete and analyze one class videotape with colleagues from given sites

7. Plan at least one Action Research Project for all in the grade level group(s)

Activities Include: 1. Report on experiences 2. Report on assessment efforts 3. Interact on new information

concerning group and individual projects and new teaching strategies

4. Show one videotape of teaching in one class for each group level

5. Analyze changes from summer, fall, and spring

6. Plan for involvement in professional meetings over summer and following fall

7. Plan for next-step initiatives, including complete reorganizing of existing course

1.

2.3.

4.5.

6.7.8.

Figure 1. The Iowa Chautauqua model: a professional development model approved by the National Diffusion Network.


112 Volume 113 (3)

excluding all who experienced funded workshops over thespan of several years. Collecting initial data before majorchanges in specific funding initiatives and focus in Iowaschools “included” investigation of affective outcomes inschools where there was no attempt to change the currentinstruction or assessment practices. These classes and stu-dents provide information about success and the results forenhancing affective outcomes from the five fundedprojects cited later.

The main research questions framing this study are:1. How is studying science perceived by students of

teachers not involved with a professional developmentproject in terms of science being perceived as fun, inter-esting, and exciting for third-, seventh-, and eleventh-grade students taught by teachers who have notexperienced any specifically funded professional develop-ment efforts?

2. How do student perceptions concerning the useful-ness of science for daily living, further study of science,and its consideration for potential careers vary in the sameor nearby schools when students are taught by teacherswho have not experienced a funded professional develop-ment program as students progress through third, seventh,and eleventh grades?

Methodology UsedContinuing Professional Development workshops have

been held in Iowa since the NSTA launching of Chautau-qua efforts in 1981 for K-12 science teachers. One featurehas been that of involving one control classroom taught bya teacher with no experience with a Professional Develop-ment workshop in the same or a neighboring school. Thiswas done primarily for reporting information to variousfunding groups to illustrate the effectiveness of thechanges, which were funded to achieve needed reforms.Such efforts were also shared with the Program Effective-ness Panel (PEP) (1992) of the U.S. Department of Edu-cation. Two of the Iowa projects enjoyed PEP approval andsubsequentially National Diffusion Network Developer(NDN) Demonstrator Program (1993–97) funding (Dass,1997). Unfortunately, NDN efforts in the U.S. Departmentof Education are no longer supported.

The control schools/teachers consisted of teachers andschools with no interest and/or experience for meetingreform goals. The teachers and schools did little other thanchoosing a textbook and using it daily to determine whatteachers taught. For the schools involved, there were noattempts to penalize the teachers or schools; all was doneto define best efforts by the teachers with all enrolledstudents.

The Iowa-funded Professional Development projectsover the 30-year interim for which one section of studentswas identified for control uses include funding and teach-ers the following year. The Iowa Utilities effort was fundedby a State business association and doubled the amount offinancial support from NSF:

1. Chautauqua I, starting summer of 1981 and endingthe spring of 1986;

2. Iowa Utilities Association, starting summer of 1984and ending the spring of 1990;

3. Chautauqua II, starting summer of 1986 and endingthe spring of 1994;

4. Scope, Sequence, and Coordination, starting summerof 1990 and ending the spring 1999;

5. Title IIa, starting summer of 2003 and ending thespring of 2008.These dates for the five projects indicate projects and datesfor collecting workshop results (Blunck & Yager, 1996;Iowa Utilities Association, 1991; McComas, 1996; NSF1987, 1995, 2000, 2010). The data collected and recordedare the same for all five of the enrolled teachers in thefunded projects and the same data collected for a controlgroups from a similar nearby school. For each beginningand ending of each funded effort, one class was selected asthe control (term not used but reported as interested teach-ers and one section of their students from “similar”schools). The size of the control schools always matchedthe situation of the teachers involved with the particularfunded project. The size of each of the classes varied from16 to 27 students.

Students were asked to respond to a brief questionnaireregarding their interest level of science classes as beingfun, interesting, exciting, or no response. In the case ofusefulness, a similar questionnaire was used where thechoices used regarding “usefulness” of school science interms of it being useful in daily living, useful for furtherscience study, or useful in encouraging potential sciencecareers, or no response. Students were also asked toprovide other data/impressions of their experiences inscience classes. Summaries of these open-ended com-ments are not included in this study because they were notcollected at similar times or for all years. Many otherAction Research Projects were undertaken by TeacherLeader teams.

The questionnaires for students of teachers for fundedworkshops and the corresponding control group teachersrequired students to give but 15 minutes to complete thequestionnaires. This was a common occurrence for stu-dents because the teachers in all classrooms involved withthe various reform efforts were ordinarily interested in



student reactions regarding their efforts—and used themfor reports to administrators and parents too!

Pretesting and posttesting concerning the two facets ofthis study occurred early in the school year (October) andagain toward the end (April). Data were generally col-lected prior to and following the four-week summer work-shops. But these reports did not contain student data.Again, data for this study provide the focus of this reportand indicate what students and teachers reported duringthe academic year (after the summer efforts in classroomsof Iowa Chautauqua teachers). Student attitudes were col-lected as they started school in the fall and again in thespring. It was designed to show the actual effects on teach-ing and learning in classrooms that provided a focus onimplementing ideas following the summer four-weekworkshop. Attitudes of students in classrooms taught byteachers who experienced Iowa Chautauqua could be com-pared with student reactions of similar students taught byteachers with no Chautauqua experiences—or otherfunded Professional Development efforts. Unfortunately,such comparisons of such results between students andteachers involved with Professional Development withwhat happened in control classrooms are not central to thisstudy, but they were used to provide evidence for fundinggroups, administrators, parents, and other teachers fromother workshops.

ResultsThis study is an investigation of perceived student posi-

tive attitudes about science in schools. Two main issues arewhat happened with regard to the general positive views ofthird graders as they progressed into middle and high

school. This was recorded in addition to student percep-tions of the usefulness of science to them. First of all, asteady decline in student enjoyment in studying sciencewas observed as students progressed from third, seventh,and to eleventh grades. In other words, the more thatstudents study science in schools, the less positive are theirattitudes concerning it. This was/is not the situation formost students enrolled in classrooms taught by teachers inthe five Professional Development efforts in Iowa. Forexample, the most recently collected data from post-assessments (April of each academic year) from fivesamples indicate that 61% of third-grade students reportedtheir science class as being fun. This percent dropped to39% for the seventh-grade and down further to 26% for theeleventh-grade students. The posttesting results indicatethat there is a lack of interest among students who studyscience in the traditional classroom settings, which usuallyreflects a state of district curriculum where textbooks aretypically used to define the science courses. In such set-tings, students are seen as sitting and listening, watchingdemonstrations, and taking notes.

The results of the investigation concerning changes ofstudent attitudes toward science in classrooms for controlteachers are tabulated and included as Table 1. A steadydecline in student enjoyment was found when students hadto indicate whether or not science was fun, interesting, orexciting as they progress from third to seventh to eleventhgrades. For this study, the percentage of students notresponding is not included. But, the results indicate little orno change for students enrolled in the “control” situation.

The data collected from posttesting for the samplesshow that third-grade students are more likely to describe

Table 1Changes in Percentage of Student Perceptions From Three Grade Level Groups Concerning Their Enjoyment in Studying Science Over 30 Years

Descriptors ofScience Being

Third Grade Seventh Grade Eleventh Grade1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Pretests (October of each year)Fun 62 57 64 67 52 60 33 41 40 53 41 42 27 28 25 41 28 30Interesting 85 86 84 91 76 84 42 52 51 60 43 50 39 43 46 46 36 42Exciting 50 56 51 66 48 54 43 44 43 62 38 46 48 49 40 51 35 44Posttests (April of each year)Fun 53 66 53 74 61 61 34 38 39 43 40 39 26 30 20 32 23 26Interesting 81 84 77 81 71 70 40 48 49 59 41 47 37 41 42 43 32 39Exciting 48 53 51 64 49 53 40 43 43 59 41 45 43 45 39 47 33 41

1 Chautauqua I: 1981–86.2 Utilities Association: 1984–90.3 Chautauqua II: 1986–94.4 Scope, Sequence, and Coordination: 1990–99.5 Title IIa: 2003–08.6 Average for all five data collection points over the 30 years.


114 Volume 113 (3)

science classes as being fun than in the upper two gradelevels. An average of 60% of third-grade students reportedsuch a perception. This percent dropped on average to 39%for seventh-grade students and down further to 26% foreleventh-grade students. Science classes are reported to beless fun the longer students remain in school. Similarly,science classes are reported to be interesting for mostthird-grade students. A huge 70% of the third-grade stu-dents reported their science class to be interesting. Thispercentage dropped to 47% for seventh graders and evenlower (39%) for eleventh graders. Similarly, 53% of thethird-grade students reported their classes as being excit-ing. It dropped to 45% for the seventh-grade and 41% forthe eleventh-grade students.

Table 2 indicates that there are no significant changes inthe student perceptions of the usefulness of science studyin any of the three areas as student progress from third,seventh, and eleventh grades. An analysis of the resultsand trends is indicated using the average of the surveysfrom students in control teacher classrooms to correspondwith those from all five data sets. This added to the previ-ous information collected regarding student positiveattitudes.

Table 2 indicates results for the second research ques-tion concerning how perceptions of the usefulness ofscience for daily living, further study, and potential careersvary as students progress from third grade, to seventhgrade, and to eleventh grade. Student perceptions of theusefulness of science for daily living and further studyseem to be more stable than their perceptions of the use-fulness of science for potential careers as studentsprogress across the three grades. For example, the data

indicate that about 41% of the third-grade studentsdescribe science classes as useful for their daily lives. Thispercent dropped to 37% for seventh-grade students andstayed the same for eleventh-grade students. Little changeis seen concerning student thoughts about the usefulnessof science for daily living as seen in the data recorded inTable 2. Student perceptions of the usefulness of sciencefor potential careers declined as students progressedacross the three grade levels. Thirty percent of third-gradestudents reported that science would be a desirable careerchoice in the future. This percent dropped to 19% for theseventh-grade students and down further to 6% foreleventh-grade students.

It is interesting to note the choices regarding careerinterest. One would guess that it would increase when highschool students were polled because in general, only 50%pursue college education and the science program as anelective and enrolls. A large percentage are preparing foradvanced science for college preparation. This means thateleventh-grade students would be expected to have largerpercentages of students interested in science and engineer-ing careers. However, the opposite results are apparent.The interest starts in third grade and is larger the youngerthe student. The interest on the part of eleventh-gradestudents drops to 6%. Obviously, more attention to gainingmore interest in pursuing science careers is needed!

Student perceptions of the usefulness of science forfurther study remained nearly the same as students pro-gressed from third, seventh, and eleventh grades. Only40% of third-grade students from all five samples per-ceived that their science classes would be useful for furtherstudy. This percent decreased to 39% for the seventh

Table 2Percentage of Perceptions Held by Students for Three Grade Level Groups Concerning Their Perceptions of the Usefulness of Science Classes

Descriptors of Science Being Third Grade Seventh Grade Eleventh Grade1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Pretests (October of each year)Useful in daily living 42 51 38 36 42 42 39 50 36 40 41 41 35 40 42 39 39 39Useful for further study 39 46 42 41 39 41 46 52 50 46 41 47 51 46 38 36 43 42Useful for potential careers 41 46 32 31 28 36 28 21 19 27 23 34 14 6 2 7 3 6Posttests (April of each year)Useful in daily living 38 49 40 36 43 41 32 41 37 33 40 37 37 32 41 36 38 37Useful for further study 46 39 40 38 36 40 42 43 33 42 37 39 46 43 37 41 40 41Useful for potential careers 27 36 31 30 26 30 21 18 19 21 18 19 12 7 3 6 3 6

1 Chautauqua I: 1981–86.2 Utilities Association: 1984–90.3 Chautauqua II: 1986–94.4 Scope, Sequence, and Coordination: 1990–99.5 Title IIa: 2003–08.6 Average for all five data collection points over the 30 years.



graders but increased to 41% for the eleventh-grade stu-dents (see averages reported in Table 2). The same patternof results, concerning student perceptions of the useful-ness of science for further study, was observed in all fivesample groups. There were no significant differences inthe averages.

Over 41% of the students involved in control groupswith this study reported at each data collection pointscience as being useful in their daily lives (although indi-cation of the nature of this use has not been specificallynoted). Student perceptions about the usefulness ofscience in their daily lives as well as for further studyseems to be more stable (it did not decline across grades)than did their perceptions of the usefulness of science forpotential careers as students progressed from primary tosecondary school.

Table 3 indicates the results concerning how studentenjoyment in studying science and its usefulness arereported across 30 years (1981–2008). Student percent-ages for third-, seventh-, and eleventh-grade levels con-cerning seeing their science class as being fun, interesting,exciting, and useful for daily living as well as for furtherstudy and interest in science-related careers do not changesignificantly over time.

The most recent 2008 (pretest and posttest) data col-lected indicate that third-grade student perceptions ofstudying science as being fun, exciting, interesting, and itsusefulness for daily living, further study, and potentialinterest in careers at each grade level decline as studentsprogress from third, seventh, and eleventh grades. Similarresults concerning enjoyment in studying science and itsperceived usefulness were observed in the data collectedfrom each of the data sources at the end of each datacollection period!

DiscussionTypical teaching eliminates student motivation and logi-

cally seems to be responsible for the increasing negativeattitudes toward science that remains and increases asstudent advance across grade levels. Because student per-ceptions of science are strongly influenced by their expe-

riences in science classrooms, it is important for studentsto be more active participants in their learning rather thanbeing passive recipients as they are in most traditionalsettings. Such settings were central to this study and char-acterized the situations in control groups. It is unfortunatethat such results could not be compared with the situationsfound in the funded Iowa Professional Developmentefforts that were designed to alter the negative experiencesoriginally identified by the NAEP (1977) staff where theresults of all five projects were compared. Certainly, thereports from teachers of control group classrooms were allsignificantly different for those found in control groupclasses! The changes indicate the needed reforms, whichare central to the changing emphases concerning “desired”science teaching outlined in the National Science Educa-tion Standards (NSES) (NRC, 1996, p. 52).

There were no significant changes in the “control” class-rooms in terms of changes in student perceptions of theusefulness of science for daily lives and for further studyas they progressed from third, seventh, and eleventhgrades. These results agree with previous research findingswhich indicate that positive attitudes toward sciencedecline, while attitudes concerning its usefulness remainmuch more stable as cited earlier. Perhaps there should bemore done to help students see the applications of scienceconcepts and process skills which are not typical as focifound in textbooks and typical curricula. Perhaps such focishould characterize in-service programs as well as whatoccurs in preservice programs.

The same pattern of results concerning attitude towardscience and its usefulness was observed by George in2006. As cited earlier, his work suggests that the impor-tance of science for daily living and for further studycontinue to be of value, as students progressed fromprimary through secondary schools.

Unlike student perceptions of the usefulness of sciencefor daily lives and further study, student perceptions of itsusefulness for potential careers decline as students pro-gressed from third, seventh, and eleventh grades. A fallin the number of those who indicate interest in scienceand technology careers may be related to the decline in

Table 3Comparison of Student Initial Perceptions of Enjoyment for Studying Science and Its Perceived Usefulness for Daily Living, Further Study, and Possible Careers

1981–86 1984–90 1986–94 1990–97 2003–083rd 7th 11th 3rd 7th 11th 3rd 7th 11th 3rd 7th 11th 3rd 7th 11th

Enjoyment in studying science 65 39 38 66. 45 40 66 44 37 74 58 46 58 40 33Usefulness of school science 40 42 43 47 42 30 37 35 27 36 37 27 36 35 28Possible careers 26 21 5 16 10 3 16 8 4 30 14 4 12 10 4


116 Volume 113 (3)

positive student attitudes toward science itself, which alsoaffects the success of a country’s economy. For example,only 41% of the eleventh-grade students indicated interestin continuing study of science. As cited earlier, similarresults have been reported by a number of researchers. Apositive image of science in student minds can prevent thedecline in student enrollments in science classes whilealso increasing science popularity among students. Thismay in turn result in students making positive decisionsabout choosing more science classes for study and forpossible careers.

The data collected concerning student enjoyment instudying science and its usefulness agree with otherresearch indicated in the research associated with the fivecontrol group classrooms reported from all data sourcesChautauqua I (NSF, 1987); Chautauqua II (NSF, 1995);Iowa Utilities Association (1991); Scope, Sequence, andCoordination (NSF, 2000); and Title IIa (NSF, 2010).These data all indicate that there were no significantchanges in student enjoyment and perceptions of the use-fulness of science over the Iowa efforts for nearly a30-year interim for all five control groups identified ascontrols that allowed a comparison of teachers in class-rooms of Chautauqua leaders versus those in classroomsof teachers with no Professional Development experi-ences. These findings raise many questions about the rel-evance of what is typically taught as well as the ways it istaught in classrooms by teachers who have not experi-enced “reform” features central to the NSES and/or to thespecific features of successful Professional Developmentefforts (NRC, 1996, p. 55). It also indicates problems withmost curricula and their perceived value of the contentexperienced in school science for most students.

Conclusions and ImplicationsA steady decline in positive student attitudes toward

science study has been observed to worsen as students intypical (control) classrooms progress from third, seventh,and eleventh grades. But there were no significantchanges in the student perceptions of the usefulness ofscience study as they progress across the same three gradelevels. There is apparently a serious need for more atten-tion to science being experienced and seen as fun, inter-esting, and exciting while also being more specific interms of its potential use in schools, life outside of school,and efforts to use it in families and communities. It is clearthat Professional Development (like the yearlong activitiesthat often define funded special projects) reverse the nega-tive outcomes reported in this study (Binadja, 2012;Blunck & Yager, 1996; Salish I Research Project, 1997).

When pushed, the students studied in the control groupswere often not successful in identifying specific uses forwhat they were being taught or how the promise of its usein the future would materialize. Very few saw their sciencestudy as of interest for lifetime careers. Student experi-ences in school science in the “control” classrooms wererestricted to use of traditional textbooks and teacher lec-tures where the focus too often was exclusively on conceptmastery and an indication of improvements measured bystandardized tests.

New roles for school science were described in therelease of the National Science Education Standards(NRC) in 1996 in the United States in ways elaborated inthe literature cited initially. Thus traditional methodolo-gies, where “teachers tell and students remember facts,theories, or procedures” are no longer valued (Lapadat,2000, p. 1). The results of this study indicate that withoutmeaningful sustained Professional Development, studentattitudes deteriorate even further. They do not improveregarding negative attitudes and/or the perceived useful-ness of the science that students experience.

Interesting reports continue to be released to indicatesuccesses with developing more positive attitudes overtime following specific Professional Development experi-ences and in exemplary preparatory programs (Iowa Utili-ties Association, 1991; NSF 1987, 1995, 2000, 2010;Sadeghpour-Kramer et al., 2009). Should not such profes-sional development efforts be designed to accomplishprecise goals? Should not a consideration of how success-ful we are in meeting such goals suggest ways we can allimprove? All too often, professional development provid-ers are happy with student praise, smiles, and generalapproval of their efforts as indicators of success. Othersseek improvement based on standardized test scores thatindicate success with state standards—and focus on whatinformation is included in textbooks. Why not add studentvoices to the evaluation of programs, which include theirspecific perceptions concerning their science classes,teachers, class activities, and the perceived usefulness oftheir studies? How do these relate to the specific goals ofparticular Professional Development efforts? Why notexpect observable changes provided by direct observationsor recorded via videotapes? Or, outside of school use?Should not science students participate with personal andsocietal issues central to their studies?

Hopefully, there will be more attention to goals forimproving science teaching that go beyond topics, con-cepts, and lists from state and local curricula. Results ofProfessional Development efforts are often in contrast tothe observations reported in this study for control group



teachers. Too few Professional Development projectsexpect to see and to report on specific results that matchthe goals which frame the NSES, especially as NewScience Standards are being developed to match the 2011New Framework for the needed changes (NRC, 1996,2011; NSTA, 2011). These new efforts tend to emphasizeengineering and technology with less emphasis on scienceconcepts per se. More research is needed that leads tosuccesses and greater numbers of students reporting thattheir science experiences have been fun, interesting, excit-ing, while also being seen as useful for daily living, as wellas for further study! Much more emphasis should be usedto encourage more students to consider potential careers inscience and engineering!

ReferencesAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1990).

Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.Beaton, A. E., Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzalez, E. J., Kelly, D. L., &

Smith, T. A. (1996). Mathematics achievement in the middle school years:IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill,MA: Boston College.

Binadja, A. (2012). Improving science learning. Negeri Semarang: SemarangState University Press, Universitas Negeri Semarang—UNNES Press. InPress.

Blunck, S. M. (1993). Evaluating the effectiveness of the Iowa ChautauquaProgram: Changing the reculturing behaviors of science teachers K-12.(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

Blunck, S. M., & Yager, R. E. (1996). The Iowa Chautauqua program: Aproven in-service model for introducing STS in K-12 classrooms. In R. E.Yager (Ed.), Science/technology/society as reform in the United States (pp.298–305). Albany, NY: State University of New York.

Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The casefor the constructivist classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervi-sion and Curriculum Development.

Cho, J. (2002). The development of an alternative in-service programme forKorean science teachers with an emphasis on science–technology–society.International Journal of Science Education, 24(10), 1021–1035.

Dass, P. M. (1997). The Collier Chautauqua Program: A formative evaluationof the implementation of the Iowa Chautauqua Model of professionaldevelopment and it effectiveness in improving science teaching. (Unpub-lished doctoral dissertation). University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

Gallagher, J. J., & Tobin, K. (1987). Teacher management and student engage-ment in high school science. Science Teacher Education, 71, 535–555.

George, R. (2000). Measuring change in students’ attitudes toward scienceover time: An application of latent variable growth modelling. Journal ofScience Education and Technology, 9(3), 213–225.

George, R. (2006). A cross-domain analysis of change in students’ attitudestowards science and attitudes about the utility of science. InternationalJournal of Science Education, 28(6), 571–589.

Harms, N. C. (1977). Project synthesis: An interpretative consolidation ofresearch identifying needs in natural science education. A proposal pre-pared for the National Science Foundation. Boulder, CO: University ofColorado.

Harms, N. C., & Yager, R. E. (Eds.) (1981). What research says to the scienceteacher, vol. 3. Washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers Association.

Haselhuhn, C. W., & Andre, T. (1997). Relationships of gender, scienceself-efficacy, attitude, and subjective norm to intended enrolment in high

school biology, chemistry, and physics. Oak Brook, IL: National Associa-tion for Research in Science Teaching.

Iowa Utilities Association (1991). Leadership Development. UnpublishedFinal Report, Science Education Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

Khoury, G. A., & Voss, B. E. (1985). Factors influencing high school students’science enrolments patterns: Academic abilities, parental influences, andattitudes toward science. National Association for Research in ScienceTeaching, French Lick Springs, Indiana. Retrieved from ERIC database(ED 254-408).

Köse, S., Sahin, A., Ergü, A., & Gezer, K. (2010). The effects of cooperativelearning experience on eighth grade students’ achievement and attitudetoward science. Education, 131(1), 169–180.

Kuppan, L., Munirah, S. K., Foong, S. K., & Yeung, A. S. (2009). On theattitude of secondary 1 students towards science. International Conferenceon Physics Education (ICPE). Retrieved from http://proceedings.aip.org/resource/2/apcpcs/1263/1/118_1?bypassSSO

Lapadat, J. (2000). Construction of science knowledge: Scaffolding concep-tual change through discourse. Journal of Classroom Interactions, 35(2),1–14.

Lester, F., Garofalo, J., & Kroll, D. (1989). Self-confidence, interest, beliefsand metacognition: Key influences on problem solving behavior. In D.McLeod & V. Adams (Eds.), Afict and mathematical problem solving (pp.75–88). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Matson, J. O., & Parsons, S. (2006). Misconceptions about the nature ofscience, inquiry-based instruction, and constructivist; Creating confusionin the science classroom. Electronic Journal of Literacy through Science,5(6), 1–10. Retrieved from http://ejlts.ucdavis.edu/sites/ejlts.ucdavis.edu/files/articles/Matson%20&%20Parsons.pdf

McComas, W. F. (1996). The affective domain and STS instruction. In R. E.Yager (Ed.), Science/technology/society as reform in science education(pp. 70–83). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

National Assessment of Educational Progress(NAEP) (1977). The thirdassessment of science, 1976–77. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/

National Diffusion Network (NDN) Developer Demonstrator Program (1993–97). The Iowa Chautauqua Program. U.S. Department of Education.(Unpublished final report). Science Education Center, University of Iowa,Iowa City, IA.

National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education stan-dards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (NRC) (2011). A framework for science educa-tion: Committee on conceptual framework for new science education stan-dards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.

National Science Foundation (NSF) (1987). Chautauqua-type short course forforty grade 4–9 science teachers. Unpublished Final Report, Science Edu-cation Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City. IA.

National Science Foundation (NSF) (1995). Chautauqua in action: Advancingreforms in science education. Unpublished Final Report, Science Educa-tion Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

National Science Foundation (NSF) (2000). Iowa scope, sequence and coor-dination reform project in science. Unpublished Final Report, ScienceEducation Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City. IA.

National Science Foundation (NSF) (2010). Iowa Chautauqua for promotinginquiry teaching in eight LEAs in AEA 267. Unpublished Final Report,Science Education Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.

National Science Teachers Association (2011). New science preparationstandards for preservice teachers. NSTA Reports, October 2011,p. 24.

Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: Areview of the literature and its implication. International Journal ofScience Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.

Program Effectiveness Panel (PEP) (1992). The Iowa Chautauqua program: Amodel for effecting change in the teaching and learning of science inschools. National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.


118 Volume 113 (3)

Reiss, M. (2004). Students’ attitudes towards science: A long term perspec-tive. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Educa-tion, 4(1), 97–109.

Sadeghpour-Kramer, M., Dunkhase, J. A., Yager, R. E., & Tillotson, J. W.(2009). New teacher’s perceptions of school culture and its influence ontheir beliefs and actions: A case study from the NSF-funded IMPPACTProject at Syracuse University, University of Iowa, and North CarolinaState University. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Associationfor Science Teacher Education, Hartford, CT.

Salish I Research Project (1997). Secondary Science and MathematicsTeacher Preparation Program: Influences on New Teachers and TheirStudents. Science Education Center, Iowa City, University of Iowa, IowaCity, IA.

Schibeci, R. A. (1984). Attitudes to science: An update. Studies in ScienceEducation, 11, 26–59.

Simpson, R. D., & Oliver, J. S. (1985). Attitudes toward science and achieve-ment motivation profiles of male and female science students in grade sixthrough ten. Science Education, 69(4), 511–526.

Simpson, R. D., & Oliver, J. S. (1990). A summary of major influences onattitude toward and achievement in science among adolescent students.Science Education, 74(1), 1–18.

Topcu, M. S. (2010). Development of attitudes towards socioscientific issuesscale for undergraduate students. Evaluation & Research in Education,23(1), 51–67.

Yager, R. E., & McCormack, A. J. (1989). Assessing teaching/learningsuccess in multiple domains of science and science education. Science andEducation, 73(1), 45–58.

Yager, R. E., Simmons, P. E., & Penick, J. E. (1989). Student perceptions ofusefulness of school science experiences. School Science and Mathemat-ics, 89(4), 313–319.

Yutakom, N. (1997). The congruence of perceptions and behaviors exhibitedby twelve successful middle school teachers in implementing technology/society/constructivist practices in Iowa scope, sequence, and coordinationschools. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Iowa, IowaCity, IA.

Authors’ NotesKey Words: Student Perceptions; Student Attitudes;

Usefulness of School Science.



Documents

Changes in Student Attitudes Regarding Science When Taught by Teachers Without Experiences With a Model Professional Development Program