Examining inquiry-based learning stages of concern for high school agriscience teachers

Nathan Conner; Bryan Reiling; Christopher T. Stripling; Matt Kreifels; Angie Monheim

doi:10.37433/aad.v2i1.75

Authors

Nathan W. Conner University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0063-4110
Bryan Reiling University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5913-0614
Christopher T. Striping University of Tennessee, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5045-3492
Matt Kreifels University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6519-8711
Angie Monheim University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8596-9448

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.75

Keywords:

inquiry-based learning, stages of concern, agriscience educators

Abstract

There is documented need for improvement of science comprehension amongst high school students in the United States, and inquiry-based learning (IBL) is a recommended teaching strategy to improve science comprehension. Several researchers have focused on examination of learning outcomes for students, but few have researched the concerns of teachers who may wish to adopt IBL methodology. This study used the stages of concern questionnaire to profile ten Midwest high school agriscience teachers’ concerns regarding implementation of IBL, before and after participation in a year-long professional development program where IBL lessons were developed and used in the participants’ high school classrooms. Results indicated that while some participants showed a positive progression in their stage of concern, most professional development program participants did not progress in their concern stage, and some developed increased resistance to IBL as a teaching strategy. This suggests that teachers may need more robust and tailored support when adopting IBL for their classrooms.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

American Institute for Research. (2019, March 11). CBAM: The concerns-based adoption model. https://www.air.org/resource/concerns-based-adoption-model-cbam

Anderson, S. E. (1997). Understanding teacher change: Revisiting the concerns based adoption model. Curriculum Inquiry, 27(3), 331–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.1997.11075495

Bailey, D. B., & Palsha, S. A. (1992). Qualities of the stages of concern questionnaire and implications for educational innovations. The Journal of Educational Research, 85(4), 226–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1992.9941120

Bellah, K., & Dyer, J. (2009). Attitudes and stages of concern of elementary teachers toward agriculture as a context for teaching across grade level content area standards. Journal of Agricultural Education, 50(2), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2009.02012

Cheung, D., Hattie, J., & Ng, D. (2001). Reexamining the stages of concern questionnaire: A test of alternative models. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(4), 226–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670109598756

Desilver, D. (2017, February 15). U.S. academic achievement lags that of many other countries. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/15/u-s-students-internationally-math-science/

DiBiase, W., & McDonald, J. R. (2015). Science teacher attitudes toward inquiry-based teaching and learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 88(2), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2014.987717

Fritz, C. A., & Miller, G. S. (2003). Concerns expressed by student teachers in agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(3), 47–53. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2003.03047

Gabby, S., Avargil, S., Herscovitz, O., & Dori, Y. J. (2017). The case of middle and high school chemistry teachers implementing technology: Using the concerns-based adoption model to assess change processes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(1), 214–232. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6rp00193a

George, A., Hall, G., & Stiegelbauer, S. (2013). Measuring implementation in schools: The stages of concern questionnaire. SEDL https://sedl.org/cbam/socq_manual_201410.pdf

Gormally, C., Brickman, P., Hallar, B., & Armstrong, N. (2009). Effects of inquiry-based learning on students’ science literacy skills and confidence. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2009.030216

Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., & Clay-Chambers, J. (2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 922–939. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20248

Hall, G. E., George, A. A., & Rutherford, W. L. (1979). Measuring stages of concern about the innovation: A manual for use of the SOC Questionnaire (Report No. 3032). Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, The University of Texas at Austin. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED147342.pdf

Hayward, C. N., Kogan, M., & Laursen, S. L. (2015). Facilitating instructor adoption of inquiry-based learning in college mathematics. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 2(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-015-0021-y

Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 631–645. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1023

Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1

Luckie, D. B., Maleszewski, J. J., Loznak, S. D., & Krha, M. (2004). Infusion of collaborative

inquiry throughout a biology curriculum increases student learning: A four-year study of "teams and streams". Advances in Physiology Education, 28(4), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00025.2004

New American Economy. (2017, March 29). Sizing up the gap in our supply of STEM workers. https://research.newamericaneconomy.org/report/sizing-up-the-gap-in-our-supply-of-stem-workers/

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2016). Country notes: Key findings from PISA 2015 for the United States. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA-2015-United-States.pdf

Plevyak, L. H. (2007). What do preservice teachers learn in an inquiry-based science methods course? Journal of Elementary Science Education, 19(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03173650

Ramnarain, U. D. (2014). Teachers' perceptions of inquiry-based learning in urban, suburban, township and rural high schools: The context-specificity of science curriculum implementation in South Africa. Teaching and Teacher Education, 38, 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.11.003

Roehrig, G. H., & Luft, J. A. (2004). Research report: Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in implementing scientific inquiry lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069022000070261

Saunders, R. (2012). Assessment of professional development for teachers in the vocational education and training sector: An examination of the concerns based adoption model. Australian Journal of Education, 56(2), 182–204. http://doi.org/10.1177/000494411205600206

Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: deﬁnitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1002

Shotsberger, P. G., & Crawford, A. R. (1999). On the elusive nature of measuring teacher change: An examination of the stages of concern questionnaire. Evaluation & Research in Education, 13(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500799908666942

Shoulders, C., & Myers, B. (2011). An analysis of national agriscience teacher ambassadors’ stages of concern regarding inquiry–based instruction. Journal of Agricultural Education, 52(2), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2011.02058

Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. (2015). Concerns-based adoption model (CBAM). http://www.sedl.org/cbam/

Sundberg, M. D., & Moncada, G. J. (1994). Creating effective investigative laboratories for

undergraduates. Bioscience, 44(10), 698–704. https://doi.org/10.2307/1312513

The Nation's Report Card. (2015). NAEP - 2015 science assessment. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/science_2015/#acl/chart_loc_1?grade=12

Udovic, D., Morris, D., Dickman, A., Postlethwait, J., & Wetherwax, P. (2002). Workshop

biology: Demonstrating the effectiveness of active learning in an introductory biology

course. Bioscience, 52(3), 272–281. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0272:WBDTEO]2.0.CO;2

Warner, A., & Myers, B. (2011). Agriscience teachers’ concern profiles for content area reading strategies. Journal of Agricultural Education, 52(4), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2011.04109