“We're taking their brilliant minds”: Science teacher expertize, meta‐discourse, and the challenges of teacher–scientist collaboration

Abstract

Programs that bring teachers and scientists together have continued to achieve attention as important potential contributions to science education. Often, however, those programs place teachers in the position of learner or apprentice to the scientists. This study examines a teacher-scientist partnership program (two project sites, two teachers and one scientist at each) that explicitly sought to challenge that model, bringing science teachers into science labs to share their expertize in a collaborative project. Using a framework that probes both the actors' and analysts' perspectives on expertize, this study examines whether the promise of the program's goal for mutual learning through collaboration can be met. Analysis of interviews and collaborative products focused on evidence of contributory and interactional expertize to understand if the project was able to bring together a group that was likely to be able to collaborate successfully.Metadiscourse was then probed to gain a deeper understanding of the ways in which they spoke of the expertize of their collaborators. Findings suggest that creating collaborative teams with ideal expertize matches is challenging and that collaborative efforts are complicated by the historic status of scientific and teaching expertizes especially in relation to outreach or knowledge translation projects.

Impacts of the STEM Teacher and Researcher (STAR) Program on Teachers, Students, and Classrooms

“…Program on Teachers, Students, and Classrooms effective research mentor-research mentee matches, as well as issues of collaborations between teachers and scientists, as scientists can downplay or undervalue teacher expertise (Shanahan & Bechtel, 2020).…”

Beyond Technocentrism: Coding as Experience

“…31 In addition, the complexity of teacher-researcher partnerships and collaborations has not received any signif-icant attention in educational computing. 32 Our concern is that leaving these forms of experience out of our focus in educational computing research can edify essentialist images of device-level engagement as the seat of learning. Technological determinism-synonymous with technocentrism-is the overreliance on these images as images of educational computing.…”

“…In asking this question, our goal is to go beyond technocentrism and technological determinism. Papert's critique 33 of studies that were conducted to "evaluate" Logo-both positively 34 and negatively 35 -is particularly poignant in this regard. Technocentrism is embodied in these studies in the form of a "treatment" model: if children are provided with particular tools, they will learn X.…”

Admission test analysis of pre-service math-science teacher based on its related factors

“…These implied two critical points which are (1) learning process in especially at the middle school level, has not been able to create a learning atmosphere that supported the specific level of student's cognitive development; and (2) the existence of students who are at the concrete and transitional level will be an obstruction to internalize the substantive concepts that tend to be abstract and complex. In general, a sufficient level of logical thinking will develop in line with adulthood and supported by collaborative learning that is suitable to inquiry and teacher support (Duncan Seraphin et al, 2017;Shanahan & Bechtel, 2020;Yu & Singh, 2018).…”