Current Situation, Influence and Suggestions of China’s Elementary School Science Teacher: Based on a Large-Scale Survey in 31 Provinces

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2023.04.001

Abstract

Abstract:

To investigate the current situation of elementary school science teachers in China, large-scale research in 31 provinces was organized by the Professional Committee on Science Teaching of the Steering Committee for Basic Education of the Ministry of Education in the second half of 2021, and 131,134 valid questionnaires were collected. The current situation of the elementary school science teacher workforce involves three major aspects: faculty structure, professional literacy, and professional development. The study found that there is a serious structural imbalance in the structure of China’s elementary school science teachers, with part-time teachers and liberal arts backgrounds dominating; weak knowledge and beliefs, practical wisdom such as information technology application to be strengthened; weak professional development, lack of experimental resources and professional training. It is recommended to strengthen the teacher management of elementary science, improve the supervisory mechanism, and optimize the structure of the teaching force; strengthen the professional standards and development planning of integrated pre-service and in-service elementary science teachers; promote the reform of the content and form of elementary science assessment and pay attention to the monitoring and evaluation of the quality of elementary science teaching.

Key words: elementary science teacher, faculty construction, faculty structure, professional literacy, professional development

Yonghe Zheng, Xuanyang Yang, Jingying Wang, Jia Li, Yangxu Lu, Shuhui Li, Yujing Yang, Xiaolin Zhang. Current Situation, Influence and Suggestions of China’s Elementary School Science Teacher: Based on a Large-Scale Survey in 31 Provinces[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2023, 41(4): 1-21.

Figures/Tables 33

References 0

	陈君 & 高立伟. (2016). 教师职后培训体系改革的国际经验及其启示. 中小学教师培训, 05, 74- 78. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-1058.2016.01.020
	崔鸿, 王梦倩, & 薛松. (2021). 小学科学教育发展报告. 王挺 & 李秀菊, 中国科学教育发展报告(2021) . 北京: 社会科学文献出版社.
	段戴平 & 林长春. (2011). 美国三项中小学科学教师专业标准的比较及其启示. 上海教育科研, 08, 35- 38. doi: 10.16194/j.cnki.31-1059/g4.2011.08.009
	樊文芳. (2015). 生态取向下小学科学教师专业发展的环境构建. 继续教育研究, 03, 70- 72. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-4156.2015.02.022
	高潇怡 & 孙慧芳. (2020). 小学科学教师的跨学科概念理解: 水平、特征与建议. 教师教育研究, 32 (06), 68- 75.
	和学新. (2018). 课程改革: 新世纪的国际视野. 中国社会科学出版社.
	孔繁成. (2012). 中英两国教师教育课程标准比较及其启示. 中国教育学刊, 09, 67- 70.
	潘洪建 & 张静娴. (2018). 小学科学课程实施: 成就、问题与政策建议. 当代教育与文化, 10 (04), 39- 45.
	沈伟 & 李倩儒. (2020). 教师地位及其支持制度的国别比较: 基于中国、日本、韩国、芬兰、以色列的考察. 外国教育研究, 47 (10), 39- 53.
	孙进. (2012). 德国教师教育标准: 背景•内容•特征. 比较教育研究, 34 (08), 30- 36.
	田伟, 辛涛, & 胡卫平. (2021). 义务教育阶段的科学教育: 关键问题与对策建议. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版), 03, 82- 91.
	王钰巧 & 方征. (2016). 从TALIS(2013)解密芬兰教师教育一体化的经验与启示. 外国中小学教育, 05, 44- 48.
	巫锐. (2021). 师范性与学术性的张力——21世纪德国综合性大学教师教育课程体系改革研究. 教育发展研究, 41 (09), 56- 62. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-3855.2021.09.009
	杨帆 & 钟启旸. (2017). 教师建构主义教学能力的培养及其效果——基于TALIS 2013上海教师数据. 教育发展研究, 37 (18), 50- 57.
	杨静. (2021). 核心素养背景下教师教学能力发展现状与对策建议——基于G市中小学教师的问卷调查. 现代教育管理, 12, 61- 69. doi: 10.16697/j.1674-5485.2021.12.008
	张一鸣, 王健, 白欣, & 和渊. (2021). 美国NSTA科学教师培养标准变革及启示. 课程. 教材. 教法, 41 (12), 130- 136.
	郑永和, 王晶莹, 李西营, 杨宣洋, & 谢涌. (2021). 我国科技创新后备人才培养的理性审视. 中国科学院院刊, 36 (07), 757- 764. doi: 10.16418/j.issn.1000-3045.20210518007
	朱小虎 & 张民选. (2019). 教师作为终身学习的专业——上海教师教学国际调查(TALIS)结果及启示. 教育研究, 40 (07), 138- 149.
	Akuma, F. V., & Callaghan, R. (2019). A systematic review characterizing and clarifying intrinsic teaching challenges linked to inquiry-based practical work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56 (5), 619- 648. doi: 10.1002/tea.21516
	Dogan, S., Pringle, R., & Mesa, J. (2016). The impacts of professional learning communities on science teachers’ knowledge, practice and student learning: A review. Professional Development in Education, 42 (4), 569- 588. doi: 10.1080/19415257.2015.1065899
	Eberle, F. (2008). Teaching and Coherent Science: An Investigation of Teachers’ Beliefs About and Practice of Teaching Science Coherently. School Science and Mathematics, 108 (3), 103- 112. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2008.tb17813.x
	Jones, M. G., Gardner, G. E., Robertson, L., & Robert, S. (2013). Science Professional Learning Communities: Beyond a singular view of teacher professional development. International Journal of Science Education, 35 (10), 1756- 1774. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2013.791957
	Kind, V., & Chan, K. K. H. (2019). Resolving the amalgam: Connecting pedagogical content knowledge, content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 41 (7), 964- 978. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2019.1584931
	Lederman, N. G. , & Abell, S. K. (2014). Handbook of research on science education, volume II (Vol. 2). Routledge.
	Lederman, N. G. , & Lederman, J. S. (2012). Nature of scientific knowledge and scientific inquiry: Building instructional capacity through professional development. In Second international handbook of science education (pp. 335−359). Springer.
	Lee, S. W. -Y., Luan, H., Lee, M. -H., Chang, H. -Y., Liang, J. -C., Lee, Y. -H., Lin, T. -J., Wu, A. -H., Chiu, Y. -J., & Tsai, C. -C.. (2021). Measuring epistemologies in science learning and teaching: A systematic review of the literature. Science Education, 105 (5), 880- 907.
	Mills, R., Bourke, T., & Siostrom, E. (2020). Complexity and contradiction: Disciplinary expert teachers in primary science and mathematics education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 89, 103010. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2019.103010
	Milner, A. R., Sondergeld, T. A., Demir, A., Johnson, C. C., & Czerniak, C. M. (2012). Elementary Teachers’ Beliefs About Teaching Science and Classroom Practice: An Examination of Pre/Post NCLB Testing in Science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23 (2), 111- 132. doi: 10.1007/s10972-011-9230-7
	National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2015). Science Teachers’ Learning: Enhancing Opportunities, Creating Supportive Contexts. The National Academies Press.
	Park, S., Choi, A., & Reynolds, W. M.. (2020). Cross-national investigation of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in the US and South Korea: What proxy measures of teacher quality are related to PCK?. International Journal of Science Education, 42 (15), 2630- 2651.
	Rogers, L., & Twidle, J. (2013). A pedagogical framework for developing innovative science teachers with ICT. Research in Science & Technological Education, 31 (3), 227- 251.
	Schneider, R. M., & Plasman, K. (2011). Science teacher learning progressions: A review of science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge development. Review of Educational Research, 81 (4), 530- 565. doi: 10.3102/0034654311423382
	van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., Walma van der Molen, J. H., & Asma, L. J. F. (2012). Primary teachers’ attitudes toward science: A new theoretical framework. Science Education, 96 (1), 158- 182. doi: 10.1002/sce.20467
	Zapata, M., & Gallard, A. J. (2007). Female science teacher beliefs and attitudes: Implications in relation to gender and pedagogical practice. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2 (4), 923- 985. doi: 10.1007/s11422-007-9069-6
	Zembal-Saul, C. (2018). The Role of Teacher Education in Advancing Reform in Primary Science Education. In Primary Science Education in East Asia (pp. 229−241). Springer.

维度	一级指标	二级指标
1. 背景信息	个人情况	性别、年龄、学历、专业、所在省份
1. 背景信息	从教信息	职称、专兼任、教龄、小学科学教龄、学校类别、教师资格证、聘用方式
2. 知识与信念	专业知识	学科知识、跨学科知识、前沿知识
	认识论信念	科学本质、科学探究、科学教师角色
	教学信念	教学理念、师生关系、学生评价
3. 教学实践	一般教学法	学习心理、教学设计、教学评价
	学科教学法	概念规律教学、探究教学、跨学科与问题解决式教学
	实践型智慧	师生互动、高阶思维、信息技术
4. 专业发展	教师培训质量	内容、频率、教材培训
	教育教学支持	课时、实验员、参考资料
	学校氛围	开课安排、实验室、教研共同体
混合问题	影响原因（有序多选）、最大问题（开放题）

	男		女		t
	均值	标准差	均值	标准差	t
知识与信念	2.72	0.61	2.73	0.59	?3.621^***
教学实践	3.24	0.65	3.15	0.65	23.432^***

检验变量		20岁以下（A）	20—30岁（B）	31—40岁（C）	41—50岁（D）	51—60岁（E）	60岁以上（F）
知识与信念	均值	2.76	2.81	2.75	2.67	2.67	2.71
	标准差	0.58	0.57	0.60	0.60	0.60	0.66
	F	230.334^***
	事后比较	A>D A>E B>C B>D B>E C>D C>E
教学实践	均值	3.14	3.18	3.14	3.17	3.24	3.23
	标准差	0.65	0.64	0.66	0.66	0.62	0.71
	F	58.076^***
	事后比较	B>C D>C E>A E>B E>C E>D

检验变量		其他（A）	文科（B）	音体美（C）	教育（D）	理科（E）
知识与信念	均值	2.72	2.67	2.72	2.72	2.81
	标准差	0.58	0.59	0.59	0.59	0.60
	F	313.082^***
	事后比较	A>B C>B D>B E>A E>B E>C E>D
教学实践	均值	3.16	3.14	3.18	3.18	3.21
	标准差	0.64	0.65	0.68	0.64	0.64
	F	72.561^***
	事后比较	A>B C>B D>A D>B E>A E>B E>C E>D

检验变量		初中（A）	中专（高中）（B）	大学专科（C）	大学本科（D）	硕士（E）	博士（F）	其他（G）
知识与信念	均值	2.67	2.65	2.68	2.74	3.05	3.13	2.69
	标准差	0.62	0.58	0.58	0.60	0.60	0.87	0.59
	F	156.193^***
	事后比较	D>B D> C E>A E>B E>C E>D E>G
教学实践	均值	3.03	3.18	3.18	3.17	3.35	3.62	3.10
	标准差	0.79	0.64	0.63	0.66	0.66	0.89	0.64
	F	29.078^***
	事后比较	C>D E>A E>B E>C E>D E>G F>A