Wearing the letter jacket: Legitimate participation in a collaborative science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education reform project

School Science and Mathematics, Mar 2003 by Davis, Kathleen S, Feldman, Allan, Irwin, Chris, Pedevillano, Elizabeth Dolly, Et al

This study examines one NSF-funded Collaborative for Excellence in Teacher Preparation and describes the complexities of such a science education reform effort. A theoretical model based in community, culture, and identity is used to address key questions: How did institutional ideologies, structures, policies, and practices influence the Collaborative's success? What unique problems were associated with the university and school partnership? How did K-12 teachers' participation affect their development and the success of the Collaborative? Findings indicate that though K-- 12 participants were deemed as "pedagogy experts" and shared the inquiry-based culture espoused in the Collaborative, they felt both as project insiders and outsiders. This was due to issues of status between university faculty and K-12 teachers; teachers' less-than-active role in the Collaborative; and the constraints and narrow focus that resulted from long-established institutional, social, and political structures and that marginalized, delegitimized, excluded, and proved unattractive to teachers.

The United States is nearly two decades into a period of continuous effort to reform science education. Although there have been intensive calls (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1989, 1993; National Commissions on Education, 1983; National Research Council [NRC], 1996; National Science Foundation [NSF], 1999) and significant efforts to bring instructional reform to science classrooms, there has been little improvement in the achievement and performance of American students. Nearly 40% of U.S. eighth graders score below a basic level in science, and only 32% score at or above the proficient level (National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES, 2002). In addition, U.S. students continue to score lower than those from other industrialized nations on international comparisons (NCES, 1999,2001).

There are several distinguishing characteristics of this reform effort. It relies on a constructivist educational philosophy; it promotes inquiry and student-centered instruction; and it aims for excellence for all children. Possibly, what sets the past 10 years of reform effort apart from all previous ones is the attempt to act systemically on educational systems through the creation of collaboratives that include state and local educational authorities, universities and colleges, and industry. While the complexity of the American educational system argues for systemic efforts, the argument that they require the creation of collaboratives is less compelling. Therefore, a critical question embedded within the reform vision is, "What evidence exists that collaborations provide for the preparation of higher quality teachers and enhanced learning in the public schools?"

We have had the opportunity to research this question in our study of one of the Collaboratives for Excellence in Teacher Preparation (Collaborative) funded by NSF to prepare more science and mathematics teachers, increase the diversity of that population, and better prepare them to teach science and mathematics in elementary and secondary schools. The Collaborative that was the setting of our study includes a state university, four private liberal arts colleges, three community colleges, and seven school districts. There are several defining aspects of this Collaborative:

1. The education of new teachers is distributed among the collaborating institutions rather than being located in teacher education programs.

2. All students major in one of the academic disciplines because of state regulations and take a wide variety of science courses to fulfill general education requirements.

3. Few of the prospective secondary science teachers enter the colleges with that career in mind. The result is that there is no distinct program for prospective science teachers in any of the colleges. This led the Collaborative to concentrate its efforts on professional development of college faculty rather than on course improvement.

4. K-12 teachers acted as pedagogy experts to help college teachers learn new ways to teach.

In addition, the Collaborative was rich in untested and novel ideas. First, science content courses were taught in reform-minded ways in settings that traditionally do not focus on teacher education (e.g., a research university and elite liberal arts colleges). Undergraduates in academic courses explored constructivist learning and teaching approaches and incorporated them into teaching experiences in K-12 settings. Such understandings and practices are not traditionally explored with students until they are enrolled in preservice teacher education programs. Little is known about the ways student participation in such courses influences their conceptions of teachers, their understandings of constructivist practices, and their view of themselves as science educators.

Second, networks were established in the Collaborative between higher education faculty and public school educators. K-12 teachers were placed in the role of pedagogy experts. Rarely are such structures established, and little is known about how, and if, they work and how they influence the reform process.