Methods or Madness: Preparing the Next Generation of Elementary Science Teacher Educators
Abell, Sandra K.
Gagnon, Mark J.
Hanuscin, Deborah L.
Lee, Michele H.
Rogers, Meredith A. Park
Metadata[+] Show full item record
In recent surveys of doctoral students in all fields (Fagen & Niebur, 2000; Nyquist & Woodford, 2000), respondents shared concerns that an overemphasis on research led to inadequate preparation for teaching, curricular planning, collegiality, and service. In one study (Davis & Fiske, 1999), 50% of respondents felt they received inadequate preparation as teaching assistants, and 59% felt that faculty in their programs did not emphasize the importance of teaching. A 2001 survey (Golde & Dore) indicated that most current doctoral students are primarily interested in becoming faculty members, even though most will not begin their careers in the types of institutions where they received their doctoral training. We often use such evidence to criticize our colleagues in the sciences about the inadequacies of their doctoral programs in preparing the next generation of university science instructors. However, what happens when we look inward to examine doctoral programs in science education?
Learning, Teaching, and Curriculum presentations (MU)