Science Teacher Action Research in Top Tier Science Education Journals: A Review of the Literature

被引:0
|
作者
Feldman, Allan [1 ]
Belova, Nadja [2 ]
Eilks, Ingo [2 ]
Kapanadze, Marika [3 ]
Rauch, Franz [4 ,5 ]
Mamlok-Naaman, Rachel [6 ]
Tasar, Mehmet Fatih [7 ]
机构
[1] Univ S Florida, Coll Educ, EDU 105, Tampa, FL 33620 USA
[2] Univ Bremen, Dept Biol & Chem, Bremen, Germany
[3] Ilia State Univ, Fac Business Technol & Educ, Tbilisi, Georgia
[4] Univ Klagenfurt, Inst Instructional, Klagenfurt, Austria
[5] Univ Klagenfurt, Sch Dev, Klagenfurt, Austria
[6] Weizmann Inst Sci, Dept Sci Teaching, Rehovot, Israel
[7] Gazi Univ Golbasi Kampusu, Math & Sci Educ, Golbasi, Turkiye
关键词
Action research; literature review; research methods; science education; science teacher education; K-6; TEACHERS; REFLECTION; KNOWLEDGE; VIEWS;
D O I
10.1080/1046560X.2024.2366713
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Action research (AR) has long been promoted as a way teachers can improve their practice and increase their understanding of their educational situations. In this article we examine the impact of AR on science teacher education through a critical review of the literature. We sought to identify the goals and purposes of the AR, its mode, and the role of science teachers in authoring the articles. We selected 10 top tier science education journals and searched in them for the term action research in titles, abstracts, and key words. This resulted in 63 articles that met our criteria. The articles were analyzed using three frameworks: theoretical orientation, purpose, and mode. We found overall that there has been a dearth of articles about science teacher AR published in these journals; most had an interactive mode in which teachers were guided by and collaborated with university researchers; only three were authored or coauthored by science teachers; and almost none had political or emancipatory purposes. These findings raise questions about whether there is much AR done in science teacher education, why science teacher educators rarely publish their work in the top tier journals, why there is a lack of AR studies that are participatory in nature, and what our expectations are for practitioners to publish their work in research journals. These questions are discussed in this article.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 27
页数:27
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Action research in science education - an analytical review of the literature
    Laudonia, Ivano
    Mamlok-Naaman, Rachel
    Abels, Simone
    Eilks, Ingo
    EDUCATIONAL ACTION RESEARCH, 2018, 26 (03) : 480 - 495
  • [2] Repositioning Teacher Action Research in Science Teacher Education
    Capobianco, Brenda M.
    Feldman, Allan
    JOURNAL OF SCIENCE TEACHER EDUCATION, 2010, 21 (08) : 909 - 915
  • [3] The Contributions of Philosophy of Science in Science Education Research: a Literature Review
    Liu, Wencheng
    Li, Xiaofei
    Li, Gaofeng
    SCIENCE & EDUCATION, 2023,
  • [4] Science teacher identity research: a scoping literature review
    Yanfang Zhai
    Jennifer Tripp
    Xiufeng Liu
    International Journal of STEM Education, 11
  • [5] Science teacher identity research: a scoping literature review
    Zhai, Yanfang
    Tripp, Jennifer
    Liu, Xiufeng
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STEM EDUCATION, 2024, 11 (01)
  • [6] Action research in the field of science education: a view from spanish journals on education
    Romera-Iruela, Maria-Jesus
    ENSENANZA DE LAS CIENCIAS, 2014, 32 (01): : 221 - 239
  • [7] Design Science Research in Top Information Systems Journals
    Goes, Paulo B.
    MIS QUARTERLY, 2014, 38 (01) : III - VIII
  • [8] The Peer Review Process in Science Education Journals
    Dale Baker
    Research in Science Education, 2002, 32 : 171 - 180
  • [9] The peer review process in science education journals
    Baker, D
    RESEARCH IN SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2002, 32 (02) : 171 - 180
  • [10] RESEARCH OF SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTION ON TEACHER TRAINING IN THE AREA OF SCIENCE EDUCATION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF LITERATURE ON DIGITAL PLATFORMS
    Lobo, Deisire Amaral
    Barwaldt, Regina
    HUMANIDADES & INOVACAO, 2022, 9 (21): : 246 - 260