The purpose of this study was to examine programmatic factors that positively impact changes in elementary preservice teachers' teaching self‐efficacy beliefs. Specifically, it examined the impact of science methods courses, student teaching, and science content courses on elementary preservice teachers' science teaching self‐efficacy. The Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument Form B was administered, using a pre/post design, to undergraduate elementary education majors in specific education and science content courses. A total of 399 responses were collected, of which 172 had matching pre/post surveys suitable for analysis. Students in the science content courses and student teaching seminar showed no significant change in either the Personal Science Teaching Efficacy (PSTE) or the Science Teaching Outcome Expectancy scales during the time they were enrolled in the classes. Significant gains in PSTE were found for students enrolled in the science methods course. The specific design of the education program and methods course may be responsible for these changes.

The purpose of this study was to examine 5th, 7th, and 10th graders' attitudes toward school and classroom science by means of questionnaires. In particular, the study hoped to determine (a) what

The purposes of this study were to observe the teaching practices occurring in student teachers' science and mathematics K-12 classrooms, compare the student teachers' perceptions of their teaching with what was actually occurring in their classrooms, and determine which college faculty members and courses these student teachers felt contributed to the teaching methods they used. Data on each student teacher were gathered via field notes of three classes, an observation protocol completed after each lesson, and an interview. Composites were written for each of the students. The total data set of all composites was examined to see if any patterns generalizable to the whole were evident. Differences between and among grade levels and content areas surfaced and are discussed.

These standards provide performance expectations that reflect a three-dimensional approach to learning science that integrates (i) Disciplinary Core Ideas (DCIs) of the life sciences, physical sciences, Earth and space sciences, and engineering and technology, (ii) Crosscutting Concepts (CCCs) that connect knowledge across these disciplines, and (iii) Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs) that reflect the means by which scientists and engineers engage "in a systematic practice of design" (NRC, 2012, p. 11) More specifically, the Framework argues that these three dimensions (3D) should weave through every aspect of science education, most critically, curriculum, instruction, and assessment. This affects science teacher preparation.In 2014, the National Science Teachers' Association (NSTA) adopted the Framework as the guiding principles for teaching and learning science and engineering. With this adoption, it was realized the existing 2012 Science Teacher Preparation Standards needed to be updated. To match the goals of the Framework, the 2012 Science Teacher Education Standards were expanded to include K-12 grade bands beyond the prior focus on secondary grades alone. This focus on secondary teacher preparation evolved from the use of the 2012 Science Teacher Preparation Standards by the Council for Accreditation of Education Programs (CAEP) for accrediting teacher preparation programs. With the relationship between NSTA and CAEP now dissolved, NSTA had an opportunity to rethink (in light of the Framework), what teachers should know and be able to do in order to provide quality science education K-12.In 2015, the NSTA Board of Directors reached out to the Association for Science Teacher Education (ASTE) to develop a joint committee charged with revising/developing a new set of science teacher preparation standards that would better reflect the goals of the Framework. From 2016 to the early part of 2018, this committee designed and sought multiple rounds of feedback from various professional subject-specific science teaching

This paper reports on initial results from an ongoing evaluation study of a National Science Foundation project to implement reform‐oriented teaching practices in college science and mathematics courses. The purpose of this study was to determine what elements of reform teaching are being utilized by college faculty members teaching undergraduate science and mathematics courses, including a qualitative estimate of the frequency with which they are used. Participating instructors attended summer institutes that modeled reform‐based practices and fostered reflection on current issues in science, mathematics, and technological literacy for K‐16 teaching, with an explicit emphasis on the importance of creating the best possible learning experience for prospective K‐12 science and mathematics teachers. Utilizing a unique classroom observation protocol (the Oregon‐Teacher Observation Protocol) and interviews, the authors (a) conclude that some reform‐oriented teaching strategies are evident in undergraduate mathematics and science instruction and (b) suggest areas in which additional support and feedback are needed in order for higher education faculty members to adopt reform‐based instructional methodology.