Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 1
NEW SCIENCE TEACHERS’ SUPPORT NETWORK: HOW CAN WE HELP
PROVISIONALLY LICENSED TEACHERS SUCCEED?
DONNA R. STERLING
George Mason University
dsterlin@gmu.edu
WENDY M. FRAZIER
George Mason University
wfrazier@gmu.edu
MOLLIANNE G. LOGERWELL
George Mason University
mgeorge2@gmu.edu
ANASTASIA KITSANTAS
George Mason University
akitsant@gmu.edu
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under
Grant No. 0302050. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations
expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the
views of the National Science Foundation (NSF).
Abstract
As the shortage of science teachers increases, school systems are forced to hire
under-prepared teachers. The present study determines the impact of a program,
the New Science Teachers’ Support Network (NSTSN), on the success and
retention of provisionally licensed science teachers. The NSTSN provides a multifaceted support system to provisionally licensed science teachers. Support
includes formal instruction in the methods of teaching science, in-class coaching
support by experienced science teachers, pedagogical support by fellow teachers,
and content knowledge support by university science faculty. Qualitative findings
revealed that new science teachers have specific classroom management,
planning, and instructional needs. Classroom management issues focused on
“setting up” the physical environment, establishing routines and classroom
policies, provisioning of materials, teacher-students interactions, and having
“something worth doing” during class time for students. Planning issues pertained
to planning for content, instruction, organization of teaching materials, and
assessment. With respect to instructional needs, teachers struggled and improved
in their ability to focus their lessons, differentiate instruction, and effectively
utilize laboratory experiences with students. Policy implications for future support
efforts of new science teachers are provided to better support new science
teachers’ classroom management, planning, and instructional needs.
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 2
Significance
The New Science Teachers’ Support Network (NSTSN) assesses the impact of
various support factors on the success and retention of provisionally licensed science
teachers who have a science degree but little or no educational training and teaching
experience. As inexperienced teachers learn through trial and error what works in
teaching children, the children are often taught poorly, and 66% of inexperienced
teachers leave the profession within their first three years in the classroom [1]. In an
effort to support new science teachers, the NSTSN provides in-class coaching support by
experienced science teachers, pedagogical support by fellow teachers, and content
knowledge support by university science faculty. With broad implications for school
personnel and policymakers, qualitative measures are used to illuminate the complex
process of supporting new science teachers and provide guidance in how to best support
them.
Theoretical Underpinnings
Teacher Shortage
There is a growing shortage of science teachers nationally [2]. Research indicates
that well prepared teachers have the largest impact on high student achievement [1, 3, 4],
but as schools struggle to fill teaching vacancies it is inevitable that schools will be
forced to hire more and more under-prepared teachers as evidenced by hiring trends
illustrating that more than 12% of new hires begin teaching without any formal
pedagogical training and 26% of new hires do not meet the requirements for licensure in
their respective states [2].
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 3
Teacher Retention
Teacher retention directly impacts teacher shortage issues nationally. Ingersoll
[5] found that science and mathematics teachers experience a turnover rate of 16%.
Meanwhile, National Science Teachers Association [6] found during a query of 1370
middle and high school teachers with less than 20 years of experience that the main
reason teachers noted for leaving the profession was job dissatisfaction. Teachers,
including teachers with three or less years of experience, noted lack of administrative
support followed by poor salary as the most likely reason for leaving the profession. For
teachers with three or less years of experience, the third most cited reason for job
dissatisfaction was student discipline. This same study found that approximately onethird of science teachers consider leaving the profession each year.
Teacher Preparation
Since research indicates that well prepared teachers are more likely to remain in
the profession [7], the initial preparation of teachers is critical to them surviving the
beginning years of teaching and remaining in the profession. Darling-Hammond [1]
found a relationship between the depth and duration of preparation for teaching and
teacher retention. Only 16% of the graduates of five-year teaching preparation programs
where teachers completed a bachelor’s degree in their subject area and a master’s degree
in education were gone from the profession after three years. The percent of dropouts
from teaching jumped to 47% for bachelor’s degree-level teacher licensure programs.
When teachers entered the profession through a short teacher-training program, with a
bachelor’s degree and no license, the percent of dropouts was 66% by the end of the third
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 4
year of teaching. This research clearly indicates the importance of teacher education in
addition to subject area content preparation for remaining in teaching.
Research indicates a clear link with teacher classroom practice with student
achievement. The Educational Testing Service found in its study, How Teaching Matters
[8], that teacher preparation and development make a difference in student performance.
The research dispels the idea that only subject matter knowledge makes a difference.
Many provisionally licensed teachers enter teaching with no teacher training. With a
nationwide emphasis on student achievement and increased pressures on teachers, it
should come as no surprise that many provisionally licensed teachers quit the profession
even though they may have adequate content preparation. At a time when there is a need
for highly qualified teachers, we are losing science teachers who know science but are
unprepared to work with K-12 students and the culture of educational systems.
Methods
Participants
Thirty-nine provisionally licensed science teachers, working in public secondary
schools in two school systems were recruited for the study. Each teacher was
provisionally licensed, had a bachelor’s degree in science, and had less than 3 years of
teaching experience upon entry. Using a treatment-control group design, reported
findings are based on the 12 treatment teachers from the first year of the study.
Design of Qualitative Study
Each teacher was provided with the support of a coach who was a retired master
science teacher. Coaches provided the equivalent of twelve full days of support in their
teachers’ classrooms. After each visit, coaches submitted via email an overview of the
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 5
classes. They described what worked, what didn’t work, goals for improvement and plans
to meet those goals, and what they did or were going to do to help the teacher.
Qualitative data was analyzed using NVivo software to assist with the constant
comparative process of grounded theory [9, 10, 11] and cross-case synthesis [12].
Responses were coded, tallied, ranked, entered on matrices, and analyzed for further
patterns.
A Description of the NSTSN Intervention
The NSTSN training program was developed and implemented with funds from
the National Science Foundation (Grant No. 0302050). There were six forms of support
provided by the New Science Teachers’ Support Network: a basic science methods
course, a coach, a teaching mentor, an academic mentor, an advanced science methods
course, and a website.
Basic science methods course. The first form of support available to these
teachers was a 500-level basic science methods course, EDCI 573: Teaching Science in
the Secondary School, which started with a full week of planning before school began
and then had 7 follow-up sessions during the fall semester for two hours each where the
teachers analyzed samples of their students work. The course was crafted with the
particular needs of provisionally licensed teachers in mind. The course built fundamental
knowledge of science teaching and learning including standards-based curriculum design
and research-based teaching strategies. The course focused on developing inquiry-based
lessons for students to investigate science and assessing student understanding of science.
During the summer the teachers learned about classroom management strategies, created
an annual instructional plan that charted when they would cover each major topic in the
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 6
curriculum over the academic year, taught an inquiry-based lesson they would teach the
first week of school, and planned a ready-to-teach four-week unit with all support
materials that clearly and directly related to the Virginia Standards of Learning [13] and
the National Science Education Standards [14]. During the fall semester, the teachers
observed videotapes of themselves teaching and students’ learning. Further, they
conducted research on student learning. Coaches and academic mentors participated in
the methods course.
Reflective practice was a fundamental precept of the first science methods course.
As the teachers began their teaching, they rejoined their classmates every two weeks to
reflect on their experiences in the real world of the middle and high school classroom.
The ideas proposed in the summer week of coursework were refined and revisited in the
light of their own students and experiences teaching. During the fall semester, the
teachers shared samples of student work from their classes (from the top, middle, and
bottom third levels of student performance). They discussed what SOL concepts were
targeted, what the students understood about the concept, and what the students did not
understand about the concept. As a final product, teachers produced a portfolio that
specifically focused on student learning.
Coaches. The second element of support was the coaches, who provided inclassroom support for all participants in the treatment group. These coaches were retired
master science teachers, recommended by science specialists in the school districts.
Coaches were assigned to the teachers within the first week that the teachers entered the
program. These coaches provided hands-on support while in the classroom with the
provisionally licensed teacher. They co-planned and sometimes co-taught lessons. The
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 7
coaches met with the teachers for 96 hours during the first academic year, with more
visits at the beginning of the year than the end. During the second academic year, coaches
continued to visit their teachers for a total of 24 hours with one visit at the beginning,
middle, and end of year. Coaches provided help and consultation for many situations the
new teachers faced. Some areas in which coaches provided advice and other assistance
included developing classroom and laboratory management strategies, planning shortterm and long-term organization of standards-based course content, assessing student
progress and achievement, and finding and creating teaching materials.
Teaching mentors. The third form of support was a mentor provided for all first
year teachers, meeting a requirement of the state of Virginia. Mentors taught in the same
school as the first year teacher and were usually experienced classroom teachers who
taught the same subject. They were assigned by the schools. Teachers who were second
and third year provisionally licensed teachers chose their own teaching mentor based on
whom they thought would provide the most support. Mentors could be available before
and after school, during planning periods, and for “between class” conversations.
Mentors provided support to new teachers in the form of help with finding resources for
teaching, providing information on the school's protocols, and providing teaching ideas.
Academic mentors. Four university faculty members were recruited to be
academic mentors to the participants in the New Science Teachers' Support Network.
These faculty members were selected because they related well to future teachers and
their area of science specialty was the same as a licensure area for high school science
teaching (Earth science, biology, chemistry, or physics). Academic mentors met the
provisionally licensed middle and high school science teachers during the summer week
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 8
of classes and were available throughout the year to the new teachers for questions about
the science content through email, via telephone, or face-to-face meetings. They also
each presented a ”New Frontiers Seminar” during the academic year when they shared
cutting edge research in their field during one of the class session for the courses.
Advanced science methods course. The fifth element of support was the second
science methods course, EDCI 673: Advanced Methods of Teaching Science in
Secondary Schools, which met once a week during the spring semester. The course built
on the fundamentals of curriculum design and teaching from the first science methods
course. The course focused on using technology for students to investigate science and
adapting inquiry-based lessons to the special needs of students. The entire course focused
on embedding technology throughout teaching and learning.
The technology goals for the provisionally licensed teachers were to build a
repertoire of teaching and assessment strategies using technology to help students
become scientifically literate and see relationships among science, technology, and
society; demonstrate the use of technology in teaching science; and develop inquirybased lessons for students to use technology to conduct science experiments, to research
science issues, to analyze data, and to communicate findings.
The new teachers gained experience setting up and using probeware, simulations,
spreadsheets (Excel), presentation programs (PowerPoint), the Internet, SMART Board
technology, and course management software (Blackboard). Additionally, the teachers
were divided into four subject area teams based on their area of licensure (Earth science,
biology, chemistry, or physics). In their team, they used technology that scientists use and
created technology-based activities to help students learn science. To further their
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 9
knowledge and use of technology in teaching, they chose one technology they had not
used before and set it up to use with their students. In addition, the teachers created a
web-based inquiry activity for their students to use to learn science and they wrote a
proposal to purchase technology for use in their classroom.
The special needs goals for the provisionally licensed teachers were to critique,
adapt, and construct standards-based lessons that include assessment and hands-on
experiences for the diverse needs of learners including gender equity, cultural diversity,
English language learners, high and low achievement, and the physically, socially, and
emotionally challenged. The teachers worked collaboratively with their peers to adapt
instruction and conduct research on student learning in order to meet the special needs of
students and to extend or improve their students' understanding of science. The teachers
conducted collaborative action research on the learning of two students in their classes.
The two students were from different special needs groups – English Language Learners,
gifted and talented, learning disabled, socially or emotionally challenged, and physically
handicapped. They gathered information about their students and their special needs,
planned for teaching and assessing student understanding, implemented plans and data
collection, analyzed data, and presented findings using presentation software
(PowerPoint) and graphical representations of data (Excel). During the process they
learned about online resources that are available to them when future students have
different needs and challenges.
Website. The NSTSN website was created for recruiting teachers and to support
the teachers in the second methods course. The NSTSN website is part of the Center for
Restructuring Education in Science and Technology (CREST) website housed on a GMU
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 10
server. This website provides descriptive information about the NSTSN and recruiting
information. The website also includes teacher resources that consist of links to teaching
strategies to meet the special needs of students and information on technology resources
for science teaching. There is also a password-protected Blackboard website to support
the students in the second science methods course.
Results
To inform policy related to the training of provisional science teachers, the
struggles and successes of the 12 treatment teachers during their first year of teaching, as
reported by their coaches, were qualitatively analyzed for emergent themes and patterns.
Findings focused on three major categories impacting policy: classroom management,
planning, and instruction. Within these three major categories multiple sub-categories
emerged.
Classroom Management
Emergent categories with respect to new science teachers’ classroom management
are depicted in Figure 1. Foci within classroom management included “setting up” the
physical environment, establishing routines and classroom policies, provisioning of
materials, teacher-student interactions, and having “something worth doing” during class
time for students. For classroom management, the two main issues initially emerged:
setting up the physical environment and establishing routines and classroom policies. At
the beginning of the year, coaches stressed the importance of the physical environment in
supporting classroom management, with coaches helping four of the 12 treatment
teachers rearrange student desks and other classroom furniture in order to create a more
conducive learning environment. For example, one coach explained:
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 11
The student lab tables have been rearranged to prevent people from
tripping on backpacks and to make it easier for teachers to move around
the room to help students. [My new teacher] also moved the class TV and
her teacher’s desk with the computer so she can access the chemistry
storage room more easily and safely. She can also see the whole class
when seated at her desk.
Coach reports highlighted the new science teachers’ struggles with the physical
classroom environment that were beyond the new science teachers’ control. For example,
two teachers taught in non-science classrooms, had no water or gas, and minimal
electrical outlets. Coaches also noted that some teachers’ schedules that required
changing rooms made it extremely difficult to establish a productive classroom setting.
For example, one teacher taught four different physics courses with two of them meeting
simultaneously in the same classroom. Another teacher had a schedule that included
teaching Earth Science, physics, and chemistry in three different classrooms. Two other
teachers changed rooms for every class. As a result, coaches helped in ways that they
could while providing support and guidance:
In terms of moving, we discussed the possibility of asking the other
teachers if she could stay in one room during a lab day and the other
teachers move on this day. We could possibly accomplish this through the
department chair, also a relatively new teacher. This will be pursued after
[the new teacher] has time to consider it and decides that she would like
to do so.
Effective establishment and use of routines and policies was the second most
mentioned area related to classroom management. Though all teachers received
assistance with establishing routines, eight of the 12 treatment teachers needed to have a
more established procedure for grouping students for activities. One coach noted, “In
order to make the transition to a group activity smoother, we discussed various ways of
dividing into groups: numbering off, color selection of paper, regrouping at tables for a
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 12
few.” Additionally, six teachers needed to remember to bring closure to their lessons,
five teachers needed to use seating charts more consistently, and four teachers needed to
develop a procedure for calling on students. As one coach explained, even random
selection of students during class can be structured through the use of “name sticks”
where each student’s name is written on popsicle sticks and the teacher randomly selects
a stick. Coaches support their teachers in this area throughout the year. Two teachers in
particular needed repeated assistance in establishing and enforcing classroom rules.
Interestingly, coaches provided this support while being sure to remind the teachers of
their progress they had made. For example, one coach noted:
One thing that [my new teachers] must realize is when there is a goal for
improvement, it doesn’t mean to “forget” about the positive things that
one has established in one’s teaching strategy or technique. …[S]ome of
the goals need to be instituted …[next] September since they deal with
basic class rules.
On the positive side, coaches noted that routines and policies were the areas in which
teachers made the most progress. Ten of the 12 treatment teachers consistently used
agendas, nine teachers routinely utilized warm up activities, and four teachers regularly
posted the standards being addressed. One coach states, “Students seem to go with the
flow of basic routines during the class since [my new teacher] consistently has an agenda
on large laminated lined paper and basically sticks to it.” Coaches also noted that nine of
the 12 treatment teachers improved in their strategies for grouping students for activities,
and six teachers became better at providing lesson closure. For example, one coach
explains a way in which their new teacher provided closure after a laboratory experience:
During the last few minutes of class [my new teacher] passed out a card
with one of the words from the EDD [Experimental Design Diagram],
and had a group of four students work on a way that they could
demonstrate their word for the class to guess. He called this “Show Me
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 13
the Word.” It is like charades. Students found this challenging and gave
them a way to be creative.
Additionally, coach reports revealed that three teachers developed alternative ways of
calling on students including the use of name sticks as previously described, an insistence
upon hand raising, and strategically calling on off-task students as a classroom
management strategy.
Materials were one of the top five areas mentioned by the coaches in their reports.
Coaches helped four teachers with equipment for their classrooms. Assistance took the
form of mounting pencil sharpeners, locating and organizing lab paraphernalia, and
repairing nonfunctional equipment such as a force board, probeware, an induction coil,
and a Van de Graf generator. Additionally, having all materials available and organized
for student use was an area needing improvement by eight teachers. One coach noted:
[My new teacher] and I discussed the need for adequate preparation -something that has been detected in just about every class. He either has
to leave the classroom to get materials or he encounters material that he
does not seem to have reviewed recently. For example, in the chem [sic]
lab, he should have known there was no steel wool and could have
instructed all students of this prior to their entry into the lab. He might
also have demonstrated the way to make the coil and leave a handle.
Even if the teacher had located and tested all equipment before using it with students, the
coaches noted that they frequently assisted with ensuring that equipment remained
functional through multiple classes using the equipment and they assisted with selecting
ways in which to distribute equipment to students. The teachers needed help with
selecting appropriate visual aids with coaches noting that six teachers needed help in this
area. For example, coaches helped the teachers use the overhead, laser disc, and dry erase
board at the front of the room to more clearly convey information to maintain classroom
management. Additionally, one coach in particular noted the effectiveness of using the
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 14
overhead and students’ individual/group dry erase boards to manage data collection
during laboratory experiences. Coach reports reveal that ten of the 12 treatment teachers
did become better at provisioning materials and four teachers improved in their use of
visual aids. With respect to effective use of visual aids, coaches recognized effective use
of concept mapping in class. For example, one coach explained how their teacher used a
concept map as an introductory activity for class:
Each student received a card with an element or formula on it. They were
to place these cards on a concept map that had four columns (atom,
element, molecule, compound). Each card and the map had Velcro so that
they would stay in place. After the cards were placed on the map, [the
teacher] used one of the formulas (SiO2) to illustrate how it could be a
non-polar compound and used this as in introduction to something that
they will study in [the next unit].
The coach praised the teacher for using this strategy as a way to “get the class
focused” for the laboratory experience scheduled that day.
Three main areas emerged related to teacher-student interaction under the
category of classroom management: communication of expectations, monitoring of
student behavior, and enforcement of expectations. Coaches cited communicating clear
expectations as an area needing improvement for five teachers and an area in which they
assisted four teachers. For example, one coach noted:
We also discussed making the lab more of a “business like atmosphere”
in which students concentrate on their work and eliminate socializing.
[My new teacher] wanted to know how to do this. Once again, I
suggested clear expectations of behavior and noted that sometimes
change in the middle of the year is difficult…
In terms of monitoring student behavior, during their visits coaches helped eight of the 12
treatment teachers supervise students. One coach reflected:
Progress has been made in terms of classroom expectations and student
behavior. We will continue to work on this as well as “teacher
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 15
preparation” for class and lab activities. In addition, we are working on
the ability to observe all activity in the classroom even while assisting
individual students or groups.
Other coaches described how they specifically assisted in monitoring students during
their school visit. For example, one coach explained, “Most students seemed to
understand the assignments, although they needed minor assistance. I helped as needed,
moving close to students who were being disruptive, placing a hand on a shoulder if
warranted to refocus attention to the lesson.” Additionally, as they modeled proximity
control the coaches encouraged three teachers to use it more often and noted that one
teacher left the room upon occasion. In the area of enforcement of expectations, three
teachers were noted as needing to use positive reinforcement more often as well as
utilizing wait time to gain student attention. Overall, however, coaches observed that five
teachers routinely used humor when interacting with students and eight teachers had
excellent student rapport. For example, one coach noted that her new teacher “has a good
sense of humor and his students participated in the lesson and also enjoyed his humor.”
Meanwhile, coaches also helped their new teachers infuse more humor into their teaching
as one coach explained, “I showed [my new teacher] another copy of Science Scope from
NSTA. It had a lot of good selections for using humor in the classroom. It reminded him
to assign the students to make [a] cartoon depicting one of Newton's three laws of
motion.”
The final area of classroom management, “something worth doing,” directly
relates to planning and instruction, the other two topics that emerged from the coach
reports as areas in which all treatment teachers needed to improve. A teacher could have
the perfect room setup, solid routines and policies in place, all materials ready to go, and
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 16
excellent interactions with students and still not have good classroom management as
evidenced by the coach reports. For example, one coach noted:
We reviewed some of the ideas that had been discussed during the year of
how to tie in labs and student directed activities. Another area that bothers
[my new teacher] is the lack of motivation of the students to learn. One
way to help motivate students is to help them feel as though they can be
successful in the subject and to tie the learning into everyday life
experiences. The classroom demonstrations that were done at the NSTA
convention could be used for ideas in this area.
Another coach explained:
During the lecture time, [my new teacher] needs to engage students into
the discussion especially when they have some background knowledge of
the subject matter (Does anyone know the normal body temperature of a
person?) He can then proceed to go over the formulas of Celsius,
Fahrenheit, and Kelvin conversions.
Even during laboratory experiences where the students are fully engaged, one
coach explained that the students’ data needs to be made “relevant with
examples.” Without well-planned instructional activities to keep students
engaged all of the other pieces could unravel. Sadly, one coach reflected upon a
time where the students were grossly not engaged in “something worth doing.”
The coach noted:
I did not observe any student working on Active Physics and most
of the students were doing their own thing, some sitting on top of
their desks and others socializing. One student was decorating the
chalkboard with drawings and another student came in with
donuts. The donuts were shared. Those two students left the class
looking for cups for the soft drinks.
Planning
Emergent categories with respect to new science teachers’ planning efforts are
depicted in Figure 2. For planning, several issues emerged regarding planning for
content, instruction, organization of materials, assessment, and grading. Specifically,
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 17
long-range planning of content, planning content for the next several months or even the
entire school year, was neglected by many teachers. For example, a coach identified a
conversation they had with their treatment teacher on this topic and how planning allows
for ownership of lessons in an environment where curriculum guides are used: “We
discussed at length the necessity of planning, both long range and short term not just
using curriculum guides provided by the county. In this way the lessons will become
[hers/his].” Becoming familiar with the content included in a yearlong curriculum was
troublesome for teachers new to the profession. While all 12 treatment teachers had the
equivalent of an undergraduate degree in their science content area, treatment teachers
were not adept at determining the scope and sequence of content to be included in the
secondary level course they were assigned to teach. This lack of familiarity with the
scope and sequence of content was an impediment to their ability to actually design daily
lessons. One coach remarked: “The biggest problem for [the teachers] this year was
trying to learn the curriculum and then plan and develop lessons for the students.” In
addition to the stress of planning daily lessons in the context of a larger scope and
sequence of science content, the treatment teachers were faced with the task of needing to
introduce science concepts to students in a meaningful way. Because they lacked a
fundamental grasp of the scope and sequence of the content they were to teach at the
secondary school level, the teachers also seldom provided explicit connectivity in their
lessons to build and link science concepts and topics. For example, one coach noted that
they spent time “discuss[ing] the importance of tying a new lesson into one the students
have already done” and how “[p]roviding the connections for students helps them see the
big picture and remember the material.”
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 18
Planning for instruction differed from planning for content in that planning for
content describes the scope and sequence of content taught throughout the entire course,
as well as the daily scope and sequence of content taught over the course of a unit of
study, or the scope and sequence of content taught during the implementation of a daily
lesson plan while planning for instruction pertains to teachers’ planning related to the
actual selection and pacing of instructional activities in daily lesson plans. Nine out of the
12 treatment teachers needed to specifically improve their planning for instruction. Unit
and daily lesson planning was a factor related to “time”, though teachers who did not plan
structured lessons may have simply chosen not to do so. Several teachers resisted using
structured lesson plans, despite the urging of their coaches as a means of improving the
pace of classroom instruction. Additionally, the link between planning, pacing, and
classroom management was noted by the coaches in that treatment teachers were advised
to develop detailed lesson plans. For example, one coach reported: “[The teacher] has
assured me he will have lesson plans, not just an agenda, for the next visit. [The teacher]
will continue to work on classroom management issues although improvement has been
noted.” Coaches encouraged teachers to develop detailed lesson plans so that pacing
could be considered, students could be provided with an appropriate amount of well
planned activities detailed, and the processes for transitions defined so that the teacher
could use their classroom instruction to effectively manage their students. Next, the
coaches noted the relationship between teachers’ planning and its impact on student
learning. One coach reported:
[The teacher] has an agenda written for each class and has estimated the
time it will take to cover each topic. [The teacher’s] concern was that
[she/he] could not stick to the allotted time in each of [the] classes. We
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 19
discussed the fact that the timing often has to be flexible to a certain
extent because of different questions from the students and also being
able to utilize a teachable moment. [The teacher] is well organized with a
written plan for her classes and it was suggested that at the end of each
class she just writes what she still needs to cover in that class on a sticky
note and attach this to the plan.
This practical advice from the coach highlights the importance of having well developed
plans so that the teacher can make an informed conscious decision to take advantage of a
teachable moment with the students while ensuring that all content is “covered.” With a
well-developed plan, the teacher can focus on what’s most important. One coach noted
the importance of discussing the focus of student learning by reporting:
… [I]t is a good idea to plan lessons with the question in mind, “What do
I want the students to learn?” The more discussion and thought they give
to these ideas the more they learn and put this information into long term
memory.
Related to planning for instruction, the coaches also noted the planning needs that
are specific to science teachers. Coaches specifically assisted nine out of the 12 treatment
teachers with their use of laboratory experiences as an instructional strategy. As the
science teachers utilized hands-on materials during laboratory experiences, pacing was an
issue. One coach noted that their teacher needed to “[w]ork on pacing activities. If there
are too many activities, students do not have time to absorb the information. Students
need time to complete the lab work without rushing.” Another coach noted that the
teacher needed to include the provisioning of equipment as they planned the pacing of
activities during their lesson:
After the announcements, [the teacher] called the students’ attention to
the agenda. [She/He] then left the room to obtain springs for the
experiment. Although there were four groups, each consisting of 6-7
students, there were only three springs. Thus, one group had to wait until
another finished collecting data.
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 20
Lastly, coaches noted the insurmountable task some of their treatment teachers faced with
planning laboratory-based science instruction when the teachers were assigned to teach
different courses with different curricula, pacing, and types of students. One coach noted
in frustration:
[The teacher’s] biggest challenge in the classroom is [her/his] classroom
management. Class control, lesson planning, and lab preparation will
need to improve. Lesson planning and pre-lab set up may be a direct
result of having three different preps at the same time. [The teacher] has
absolutely no problem with the subject matter.
Planning related to organization of teaching materials was a specific issue for four
out of the 12 treatment teachers. The treatment teachers needed help in maintaining
organization during the lesson, storing their teaching materials in a convenient manner,
and maintaining a record of their teaching. To maintain organization of teaching
materials during the lesson, one coach recommended that the teacher use a structured
lesson plan format consistently. To store their materials in a convenient manner, another
coach suggested that their treatment teachers use their “own notebook to organize
handouts and transparencies arranged by quarter or topic.” Additionally, the notebook
was viewed as a location in which a treatment teacher could maintain a “list of learning
strategies.”
Planning for assessment was an area of concern for treatment teachers where
coaches noted the need for improvement and/or provided assistance to eight out of the 12
teachers. Coaches encouraged their treatment teachers to incorporate grading into their
classroom instruction. For example, one coach recommended:
To involve more students in reviewing the worksheets, you might have
them pair with their seat partners and quietly go over the answers, as you
walk around the room and check off quickly if they are done. This gives
each student a chance to verbalize the vocabulary and explain the
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 21
information to another student. You then have the homework checked off
and this eliminates the paper backlog. Those students who did not get full
credit can turn it in later per your homework rule.
Coaches also modeled for teachers how to most efficiently assess student work including
the development of a grading key, creating multiple versions of tests, creating a
standardized framework for student responses, determining the depth of corrections
needed, and using time during and outside of class for assessment purposes. One coach
noted:
The two main obstacles for [the teacher] during the first quarter were
keeping current with the grading (There are four tests for each unit plus
the lab book.) Another issue was trying to fit the extra AP Chemistry
topics into the current schedule of time. These two problems have been
addressed and solutions are being worked out. As for the grading, [the
teacher] feels that [she/he] is becoming more efficient in grading and
alternative ways of grading the lab notebooks are being tried. The
solution for having more time for instruction has been solved by having
the AP students do their essay test at home and that allows for 45 more
minutes for instruction.
Lastly, coaches graded sets of students’ work for and with their treatment teachers. Faced
with the challenges of being new to teaching, treatment teachers needed help in providing
feedback to students on their work in a timely fashion. Even while assisting the teacher
by grading some of the student papers, coaches used the experience as a teachable
moment. One coach reported: “I also graded the homework with [the teacher] and
xeroxed some new material with [her/him]. This gave us a good opportunity to talk about
many issues.”
Instruction
Emergent categories with respect to new science teachers’ instructional skills are
depicted in Figure 3. For instruction, several needs emerged with respect to lesson focus,
differentiation, professional dispositions, and laboratory activities. For example, teachers
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 22
were weak in focusing their lessons at the beginning of class with seven out of 12
needing to use warm-ups more consistently as a strategy for focusing students on the
purpose of the lesson along with five teachers who needed to work on providing clearer
directions. Coaches frequently recognized that the lack of clarity of instruction resulted in
a lack of students’ understanding of both procedures and the ways in which results could
be interpreted. For example, one coach noted that their new teacher’s class “seemed
confused about the lab procedure and needed extra help to complete the lab.” While
another coach noted that “not all students followed the directions and this skewed the
class results. This point could have been discussed in more detail with the class so they
could see how the work they did would impact the results.” In an effort to support
students’ ability to properly follow instructions as well as better understand the purpose
of class experiences, the coaches assisted four teachers on clarifying directions. For
example, coaches gave advice about how to give directions such as “Break tasks down
into clear steps and give them a few at a time.” Coaches also helped two teachers on
developing a class agenda. Additionally, coaches modeled how to give continued
instruction throughout a laboratory experience. For example, one coach described:
As the students finished collecting their data, they began answering the
questions: (a) write a word equation for each reaction; (b) write a
balanced chemical equation for each reaction. I worked with several,
guiding them through the process. When all had returned to the
classroom, I stopped everyone and worked through the first reaction.
Most were writing the balanced chemical equation first, a
misinterpretation of the questions, and then could not understand what the
second question [meant].
On the positive side, ten of the 12 treatment teachers regularly posted class agendas and
seven teachers routinely used warm up activities. For example, one coach noted that their
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 23
new teacher “has a laminated agenda displayed which she changes each day so the
students have a general overview of the lesson.”
In terms of differentiation, the topics most frequently mentioned by the coaches in
their reports were reading strategies and providing differentiated instruction. Coaches
noted that three of the 12 treatment teachers needed direct assistance in developing both
reading strategies and differentiation techniques for the large number of special education
and English language learners in their classes. With respect to teaching special education
students, one coach explains:
[My new teacher] needed a few different activities for this class period….
He knows that there are a number of students with IEPs [Individualized
Education Plans] in this class of only 16 or so students. He needs to meet
the needs of this group in a very different way which I discussed with him
after class and made some suggestions for him to consider.
To better address the needs of English language learners, one coach notes, “We
need to work on more strategies to use with the two ESOL classes. We have
talked about the use of a word wall to reinforce the new vocabulary words.”
Another coach provided their new teacher with this guidance, ‘Go over the pages
of the worksheet and explain the expectations and also answer one or two
questions to show the students the type of questions that are there. ESOL students
will become overwhelmed with an assignment that seems to have a lot of reading
involved.” Also, coaches were able to help their teachers better reach their ESOL
students during laboratory debrief sessions. For example, one coach advised,
“When answering questions in the lab manual, it would be helpful for the ESOL
students to have someone write the answers on the overhead so that these
students can check their answer, since they may not be able to get it orally.”
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 24
Coaches were available to offer their expertise in differentiating within each class
as well as between classes. For example, one coach stated, “[My new teacher] has
to consider the type of audience he has to work with from class to class and make
more modifications in the delivery of a lesson and develop a different kind of
climate during the class period ….one size never fits all!!!!” Coaches also noted
that two other teachers were able to differentiate instruction for their students
largely due to the help of the experienced special education teachers with whom
they team-taught. One coach noted:
The team teacher is very experienced and has taught chemistry for many
years as well as working with special ed[ucation] students in Chem Tech
[sic]…. It is obvious that she and [my new teacher] work well together
and complement each other. The team teacher actually took over as the
instructional facilitator during lab time giving directions and going over
safety issues so [my new teacher] can work one on one with students.
Another topic related to instruction that was mentioned in the coach reports was
the teacher’s professional disposition. The most frequently mentioned aspect was the
teacher’s attitude with coaches noting that eight of the 12 treatment teachers had positive
attitudes. For example, one coach noted:
[My new teacher] is a very willing [teacher] and listens to all suggestions
thoughtfully and explains her rationale for doing certain procedures. This
illustrates how she is committed to constantly improving her strategies
and classroom techniques to increase learning. She has implemented
suggested strategies into her classroom, has developed ideas she has
learned from her [program] classes, and also created her own ideas.
In contrast, coaches noted that two teachers needed to improve in this area. Issues
included poorly developed or missing lesson plans, a failure to examine and perform
laboratory experiences prior to use with students, a failure to communicate effectively
and positively with the coach and school colleagues, a failure to maintain safety in the
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 25
classroom, a failure to provide quality science learning experiences for students, and poor
communication with students. Additionally, coaches assisted three teachers with
establishing professional goals. For example, one coach and teacher discussed the
following according to the coach report:
o Setting limits and expectations in the beginning are
important to establishing a positive classroom attitude.
o Feeling of confidence with using the curriculum.
o Allow students ways to find the answers on their own.
o Improve time management.
Coaches also advised three teachers to seek more support from their school mentors and
urged three others to observe other teachers. For example, one coach recommended,
“Plan to observe other [life] science teachers at least twice during the next week and
follow their plans as much as possible.” Another coach suggested that working with the
school mentor and other colleagues in the same science content area could help their
teacher better prepare the students for their standardized end-of-course tests:
Ask fellow teachers for input about the previous [standardized end-ofcourse tests] and check the [resources] available on the state website for
the number of questions on [the test for] each topic. After identifying the
most important topics, assign them to a calendar and devise your weekly
and daily lessons around them. Suggested that visiting other classrooms
and discussing with colleagues could help him plan until the end of the
year. [sic]
Coaches also observed that three of the treatment teachers had good rapport with their
colleagues. For example, one coach directly witnessed, “Later on I attended a team
meeting with with [my new teacher]. The team is very cohesive and works well together.
The other teachers respect him and honor his opinions.” Coaches specifically identified
that three of their teachers had excellent content knowledge. One states, “She is energetic,
enthusiastic, capable and above all very knowledgeable in her subject area.”
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 26
Another area of concern related to instruction was the use of laboratory activities.
Eleven of the 12 treatment teachers regularly used labs as an instructional activity
according to the coaches’ report of what they observed in their assigned teachers’
classrooms. Two teachers were cited as needing to improve how often they conducted
labs. For example, one coach noted in November, “[My new teacher] explained that this
was the first or one of the first labs the students have had.” Coaches helped nine teachers
develop additional laboratory activities to specifically match their curriculum. Coaches
mentioned bringing in materials that they had used with their own students prior to
retirement as well as working with the teachers to develop new materials. Beyond this,
one coach in particular noted how she could effectively promote sharing of curriculumspecific laboratory ideas between her new teachers in different schools teaching the same
curriculum, “I passed a number of labs that [one of my new teachers] developed to [my
other new teacher] since he said it was okay. I [also] added two other introductory labs,
which I thought her students would enjoy.” Additionally, there is a need for the coaches
to work with the teachers to extend and improve their use of teaching strategies which
encourage students’ active learning via the use of teacher-facilitated learning experiences.
For example, a coach noted for one particular teacher, “Students need to be more
involved in the learning process so that they learn…. It is a concern that the students have
not been involved in actually doing science.” Another coach reported, “We discussed
how it is important to combine lab experiences with the information taught to help the
students learn and understand.”
Discussion
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 27
Novice teachers are frequently given the worst teaching assignments in the most
difficult schools [7, 15]. Based on the coach reports and the teaching assignments given
to teachers, this research study supports this claim. Based on coaches’ direct observations
and work with the treatment teachers, the treatment teachers’ struggles and
accomplishments are discussed with respect to three emergent categories: classroom
management, planning, and instruction. Ways in which specific components of the
NSTSN influenced the new science teachers’ performance in these areas are discussed,
particularly how the NSTSN’s science methods coursework, in-class coaching support by
experienced science teachers serving as coaches, pedagogical support by fellow teachers,
and content knowledge support by university science faculty aided the new science
teachers.
Classroom Management
Quantitative analysis revealed a significant increase in the treatment teachers’
classroom management skills. Additionally according to qualitative findings based on
coach reports, classroom management was an area of concern for the treatment teachers,
but growth was observed. Specific areas of emphasis included “setting up” the physical
environment, establishing routines and classroom policies, provisioning of materials,
teacher-students interactions, and having “something worth doing” during class time for
students. Improvement in the treatment teachers’ classroom management can be
attributed to both the program’s science methods courses and the coaching support each
treatment teacher received. Through the basic science methods course and direct
coaching support [16, 17], teachers were trained in how to develop and maintain a
functioning and orderly learning environment for students. The course stressed the
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 28
design, selection, and use of classroom routines and rules that support student
responsibility and respect for self [18, 19] and others [20-27]. Through the basic science
methods course, treatment teachers were trained in safety rules and protocol appropriate
for their students’ grade level.
During this training, treatment teachers were exposed to the idea that laboratory
experiences needed to be planned and tested in advance. As science teachers,
provisioning is a particular aspect of planning that must be performed in order to promote
effective student learning in a safe environment [28]. In the basic science methods
course, the course instructed how to prepare for a laboratory experience including the
selection of materials, testing of materials, distribution of materials, and management of
materials. Problem-solving strategies were discussed for safety issues related to materials
provisioning and management. Teachers were required to provision for laboratory
experiences they taught during the class. In their schools, coaches helped teachers set-up
their room for instruction and to support laboratory-based experiences. They worked with
the teachers to prepare, test, and reflect upon the efficiency and effectiveness of their
particular laboratory experiences for students prior to conducting the activity with
students. As a result, an expectation was made clear to the teachers that provisioning was
required in order to teach hands-on, inquiry-based science effectively and safely.
Quantitative findings illustrated treatment teachers’ significant growth in their ability to
provision materials for laboratory instruction.
The growth that the treatment teachers experienced with respect to establishing
routines and policies can also be attributed to the basic methods course and the
individualized coaching support. During the basic science methods course, the teachers
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 29
were trained in how to develop and utilize classroom and safety rules, policies, and
procedures. The National Science Teachers Association’s “Position Statement on
Laboratory Science” [29] states that at least 80% of middle school science students’
instructional time, and at least 40% of high school students’ instructional time, should be
spent on laboratory-based activities including pre-lab and post-lab activities. With this in
mind and the safety hazard inherent in hands-on, laboratory-based instruction, Frazier &
Sterling [28] describe the necessity for distinguishing between classroom versus safety
rules, policies, and procedures in classrooms where there is a reliance upon hands-on,
laboratory-based instruction. Through individualized coaching support, teachers were
guided in how to establish, communicate, and use routines, policies, and procedures to
support student learning in a safe environment.
Inherent to maintaining a safe, productive classroom is communication resulting
from positive, effective student-teacher interactions. Brophy and Evertson [30] and
Wubbels, et. al. [31] identify a positive student-teacher relationship as one that combines
both teacher dominance and cooperation. Based on their prior experiences working with
students along with their direct observations of the treatment teachers’ classrooms,
coaches were able to help their teachers improve their interactions with students so that
they could communicate more clearly and effectively to students their expectations for
laboratory instruction and non-laboratory based activities. Coaches helped their teachers
to reflect on the particular classroom management issues observed and provided guidance
to the teachers as they developed and administered consequences as needed. Through
careful communication of agendas and instructions, students were informed of their
teachers’ expectations for their behavior.
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 30
Findings within this category also highlight the relationship between classroom
management, planning, and instruction. Coaches stressed the need for teachers to make
the science content relevant to the students’ interests and needs by making connections to
the real world explicit. The National Science Education Standards [14] identify standards
for content and teaching that stress the importance making students aware of the real
world connections of the science content they are learning and identify group work,
hands-on opportunities, and inquiry-based experiences as effective strategies for
improved student learning. Teachers became familiar with the National Science
Education Standards in their basic methods class and designed a unit of instruction that
included explicit connections between science content and real world applications.
Building on this experience in their basic methods class, coaches and treatment teachers
were matched by content area, so they were a readily available resource for helping
teachers make real world connections to their science content explicit. Additionally,
treatment teachers learned in the basic and advanced methods courses about researchbased strategies designed to engage students in learning and reflected on the effectiveness
of these strategies based on students’ work. Coaches provided individualized instruction
in this area based on their direct observation of the teachers’ classroom. These findings
overall illustrate the ways in which participation in the New Science Teachers’ Support
Network influenced the treatment teachers’ growth with respect to classroom
management and highlight the areas in which the treatment teachers needed support.
Planning
Quantitative analysis revealed a significant increase in the treatment teachers’
planning endeavors. Additionally, coach reports identified the struggles and successes of
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 31
the treatment teachers with respect to planning. Emergent issues included planning for
content, instruction, organization of teaching materials, and assessment. Treatment
teachers’ growth in the area of planning is attributed to specific components of the
treatment. During the basic science methods course treatment teachers developed their
annual plan of topics that they would address. Jacobs [32] highlights the necessity of
annual curriculum mapping as a process through which teachers can identify essential
topics/questions for study. This assignment allowed the treatment teachers the
opportunity to study their science content area’s curriculum in terms of scope as well as
sequence. It also allowed them an opportunity to determine the areas in which they would
need to study before planning their instructional units. To further support planning for
content, academic mentors were introduced. The academic mentors were content
specialists in the areas in which the treatment teachers were assigned to teach.
Throughout the program, academic mentors provide seminars that provide the treatment
teachers with content preparation in terms of cutting-edge research in their particular field
of study. Additionally, the coaches were specifically selected so that they had expertise
and experience in teaching the same content area as their assigned treatment teachers. As
a result, the coaches were able to share content knowledge with the teachers as needed
because they were a consistent presence in their classroom.
Treatment teachers were introduced to the National Science Education Standards
[14], their state standards, and their local school division standards during the basic
science methods course. As a part of course requirements, treatment teachers were
required to develop their first four-week unit of lesson plans and unit assessment prior to
the start of the academic year. The teachers were trained in how to design standards-
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 32
based lesson plans and units of study along with effective test-design strategies. During
the advanced science methods course, teachers adapted a standards-based unit of study
targeting the special needs students in their classroom. This course emphasized the
development, implementation, and use of the results from a coherent, carefully planned
assessment protocol, which focused on overall class performance as well as the special
needs of individual learners. As a part of these tasks in both courses, teachers were then
asked to reflect on the aspects of their instruction and assessment plan that were
successful as well as the ways in which they modify their instruction in the future for
improved student learning. Coaches were able to provide on-going support in planning
for instruction. Through planning together, coaches were able to illustrate how to
effectively plan for instruction. Additionally, coaches were able to help the teachers with
planning needs that are specific to science teachers. For example, coaches were able to
help the teachers locate science equipment, set up laboratory experiments, and perform
experiments ahead of time with the teachers so that the teachers could plan for safe,
effective instruction.
With respect to planning, in the basic and advanced science methods courses
treatment teachers were trained and supported in developing lesson and unit plans that
relied on standards-based instructional strategies [33] consistent with the needs of their
students while utilizing community resources as available. The coaches were retired from
the school divisions included in the project, so they were familiar with the needs of the
community as well as community resources available and were able to share this
information with their assigned treatment teachers. During the basic science methods
course and direct coaching support, teachers were encouraged, trained, and supported in
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 33
their use of a variety of student-centered strategies to support learning. Treatment
teachers were reminded that laboratory experiences needed to be carefully planned ahead
in order to be safe and effective. As science teachers, provisioning is a particular aspect
of planning that must be performed in order to promote effective student learning in a
safe environment [28]. In the basic science methods course, teachers were required to
provision for laboratory experiences they taught during class. Additionally, coaches
helped teachers to set-up, test, and reflect upon the efficiency and effectiveness of their
laboratory experiences for students prior to teaching. As a result, an expectation was
made clear to the teachers that provisioning was required in order to teach hands-on,
inquiry-based science effectively and safely.
As the new teachers were trying to survive their first year of teaching, the
overwhelming array of decisions and the lack of time impacted the new teachers’ ability
to thoughtfully plan beyond their immediate needs. Planning was a factor related to
“time,” though teachers who did not plan structured lessons may have simply chosen not
to do so. Several teachers resisted using structured lesson plans, despite the urging of
their coaches. Long-range planning, planning for the next several months or even the
entire school year, was neglected by many of the teachers. This lack of planning had a
direct impact on the students in terms of classroom management, instruction, and student
learning.
These findings overall illustrate the ways in which participation in the New
Science Teachers’ Support Network influenced the treatment teachers’ growth with
respect to planning and highlight the areas in which the treatment teachers needed
support. Coaches were able to provide assistance and guidance to their treatment teachers
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 34
based on their own personal experiences as science teachers. As former science teachers,
the coaches had authentic experience in planning for effective classroom management
and instruction. Sometimes their support was very basic, such as how to organize
teaching materials efficiently. The coaches were also cognizant of extenuating
circumstances within the new teachers’ teaching placement where success would be
unlikely, such as teaching assignments where the teacher is required to plan and
implement laboratory-based science instruction for multiple classes with different
curricula, pacing, and types of students. Using their own experiences as science teachers,
coaches were able to support the treatment group teachers during their struggle as firstyear teachers by modeling appropriate planning, helping their teachers plan, holding their
teachers accountable for their planning, and acknowledging the teachers’
accomplishments.
Instruction
With respect to instruction, treatment teachers struggled and grew in their ability
to focus their lessons, differentiate instruction, and effectively utilize laboratory
experiences with students. Several components of the program may be attributed to the
treatment teachers’ growth in their instructional efforts. The basic and advanced science
methods course emphasized how to use a variety of techniques to capture student interest
while clearly conveying to students the nature of science as an investigative process of
study about the natural world [34-37]. Teachers were encouraged to rely more on teacherfacilitated instructional techniques that support students’ active learning rather than
teacher-directed instructional techniques that tend to result in students’ passive learning.
As a result, treatment teachers were trained in their basic science methods course in how
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 35
to develop focused inquiry-based experiences for students that utilize real science
materials, the use of clear and coherent instructions, the use of effective questioning
techniques, and how to make connections of science content to other areas of study and
the students’ lives explicit [16]. The coaches provided further support for these ideas. In
the basic science methods course, treatment teachers reflected on their instructional
efforts based on videotapes of their teaching and their students’ work in terms of how to
better help students learn via an inquiry-based approach. Safety concerns were addressed
as needed by the coaches.
Differentiation of instruction was a focus of the advanced science methods course.
In this course, teachers completed action research projects that targeted the development
and implementation of curriculum and assessment plans with respect to the special needs
students in their classrooms. Additionally, through consistent visits the coaches were able
to support and assist the treatment teachers’ use of effective instructional strategies for
students based on direct observations of students in the classroom and student work. The
coaches could further the treatment teachers’ experience in the advanced methods course.
While the treatment teachers learned, planned, implemented, and assessed the
effectiveness of strategies for differentiation with their students, coaches supplemented
this support with individualized feedback on the particular classes they observed.
Coaches physically provided laboratory activity ideas to their assigned teachers as well as
helped the new teachers sift through the plethora of instructional science materials
available through print and electronic resources to find those activities that would be
most beneficial to students.
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 36
The coaches in the New Science Teachers’ Support Network described many
aspects of teaching that proved to be challenges to the new teachers in the project. “Lack
of time” issues were a theme in the coaches’ observations of the new teachers. “Lack of
time” fell into two categories: use of time in support of teaching, and use of time
teaching. Teachers placed in the classroom without the training that accompanies
traditional licensure programs lacked the time to understand aspects of the subject matter
in depth, to develop routines and procedures for classroom management, implement new
ideas, to organize record keeping, and to plan and implement instructional strategies with
appropriate pacing that includes the use of labs and technology to support student
learning.
To a certain extent, coaches were limited by their own experiences as a science
teacher. Beyond the use of the overhead, coaches did not often comment on teachers’ and
students’ use of technology. According to the coach observation reports, the coaches
regularly supported teachers in using science laboratory equipment but seldom mentioned
the use of technology to support learning. Either the coaches did not document their work
with the treatment teachers related to technology or the coaches themselves did not focus
on the use of technology as means of supporting student learning. At this time we can’t
state that the coaches have had an impact on the treatment teachers’ use of technology as
an instructional strategy to support student learning. This finding highlights the need for
training of retired teachers in the latest advances in science teaching. Alternately,
coaching support needs to be supplemented with targeted training sessions that focus on
advances in science teaching. To this end, the basic and advanced science methods
courses exposed treatment teachers to the latest developments in science teaching, and
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 37
the academic mentor informed the treatment teachers of cutting edge research in their
science content area.
While there may have been a need for coach training in the latest advances in
effective science teaching via technology, the use of retired teachers as coaches resulted
in a data set richly influenced by the experiences and wisdom of the coaches. Coaches
were able to identify and praise teachers’ displays of professional dispositions. At the
same time, coaches were able to occasionally facilitate, guide, and direct teachers as
needed in their path towards developing and displaying professional dispositions
consistent with effective teaching. Paramount to effective support of the new teachers’
critical reflection on their instructional efforts, the coaches provided a seasoned
perspective to their teachers.
Implications
Based on qualitative findings, implications for supporting new teachers are
provided with respect to the major issues facing new science teachers: classroom
management, planning, and instruction. Highlighted is a need for accommodations for
new science teachers so that they may have the time to perform the planning, preparation,
and reflection necessary for satisfactory performance in the areas of classroom
management, planning, and instruction. While some processes can be extended to
teachers of other content areas, qualitative findings reveal that several issues of
importance are specific to science teaching such as managing resources, conducting
laboratory experiments, and safety. Recommendations are made for which components of
support programs for new science teachers matter most according to the study findings,
specifically science methods coursework, in-class coaching support by experienced
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 38
science teachers, pedagogical support by fellow teachers, and content knowledge support
by university science faculty.
Classroom Management
New science teachers in the program had specific classroom management needs:
“setting up” the physical environment, establishing routines and classroom policies,
provisioning of materials, teacher-students interactions, and having “something worth
doing” during class time for students. There are specific ways in which programs can
help new science teachers’ classroom management efforts. First, establish support for
new science teachers prior to the start of the academic year and/or immediately upon hire.
Support must include both methods instruction and individualized support in the
teacher’s school. Partnerships between school divisions and universities can provide
group and individualized support that new science teachers need to survive. Teacher
education faculty can provide methods training to groups of new science teachers.
Retired science teachers from the school division can provide on-site, individualized
support. The role of each are explained as follows.
Methods instruction is most effective if new science teachers are grouped together
so that they can form a community of learners with similar interests and needs. Methods
instruction for new science teachers should be considered in two phases: basic and
advanced. Basic methods should be taught before school starts so that the new science
teachers have the survival skills they need to be successful. Basic methods needs to
include opportunities for the new teachers to analyze existing science classrooms and
plan for how they will arrange the furniture in their classroom. Once teachers have a plan
for their room arrangement, they then need resources for establishing classroom rules and
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 39
safety rules. Prior to the start of school and as a requirement for their basic methods
course, teachers should be required to develop classroom rules, safety rules, and plans to
assess students’ understanding of safety throughout the year. The need for, and difference
between, safety and classroom rules must be made explicit to new teachers. Prior to the
start of school and as requirement for their basic science methods course, teachers must
plan, set-up, and teach a hands-on experience for students using authentic science
equipment. During this time, the group of new teachers can reflect on the need for
provisioning in order to maintain a safe, orderly learning environment for students. In
basic science methods, the course instructor should model appropriate student-teacher
interactions and make explicit the necessity for communicating clearly with students in
order to support a safe, effective learning environment. Lastly, new science teachers can
be introduced to the idea that good instruction will result in a positive classroom
environment. If students are intrigued by what they are studying, then they will stay ontask. Through their science methods course, teachers must experience first-hand the ways
in which their science content can relate to their lives. Here, content-area college faculty
serving as academic mentors can provide information to the teachers about cutting edge
applications of biology, chemistry, Earth science, and physics to everyday life.
Individualized support provided by retired science teachers is particularly
beneficial to new science teachers. Referred to as a “coach” in the NSTSN, the retired
science teacher can walk into a classroom and immediately identify trouble spots in a
room’s arrangement. It is important that the coach have significant experience teaching
science. This way, the coach will analyze the room arrangement in terms of safety during
hands-on, laboratory experiences. In order to keep students safe, new science teachers
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 40
desperately need this help prior to the start of school. To compound their lack of
experience, new science teachers frequently do not have a room that is assigned to them.
Instead, they “float” from classroom to classroom. Coaches can help new science
teachers become aware of potential trouble spots in their classrooms, can negotiate with
the new science teachers’ colleagues to improve the physical arrangement of a room, and
can help the new science teachers develop plans for how to “make the best” of a poorly
arranged room that can not be changed. With respect to routines and procedures, coaches
can ensure that new science teachers have distributed and are utilizing effective routines
and procedures. With respect to provisioning, coaches can help new science teachers setup laboratory equipment and perform the laboratory activity with the new science teacher
prior to its use with students to ensure that the activity runs smoothly. With respect to
communication, coaches can provide reminders to teachers that students need clear,
concise instructions and expectations. Coaches can help new science teachers be more
effective by providing them with feedback based on their direct observations of the
teachers’ interactions with students. Finally, having taught similar curriculum, coaches
can help teachers plan for meaningful instruction and provide insight in how to motivate
students by making connections between the curriculum and students’ experiences.
Planning
New science teachers in the program had specific planning needs: planning for
content, instruction, organization of teaching materials, and assessment. There are
specific ways in which programs can help new science teachers’ planning efforts. As with
classroom management, new science teachers need both group formal support as well as
individualized support in their schools.
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 41
New science teachers have specific planning needs that must be met prior to the
start of school. Because school divisions may wait until the last possible moment to hire
an under prepared science teacher, a basic methods course needs to begin in summer as
close to the start of the school year as possible and then extend into fall. The NSTSN’s
basic science methods course is taught over a weeklong, intensive summer session that
occurs in the week immediately preceding the start of the academic year with follow-up
during the fall. First, teachers need to develop an annual plan for what they will teach
over the academic year so that they have an idea of the content they will be expected to
know and teach. This must be required during basic science methods prior to the start of
the academic year. Another required component of their basic science methods that needs
to occur prior to the start of the academic year is lesson planning. Teachers must be
trained in how to develop a unit of lesson plans and required to develop realistic, usable
plans. During NSTSN’s basic science methods, new teachers plan their entire first month
of school so that they walk in the door the first day of the academic year with a
completed set of lesson plans. While lesson plans created prior to the start of the
academic year should include assessment, details on assessment can be stressed more
during the follow-up session in the fall once the new science teachers have student work
to analyze. During the fall, new science teachers desperately need opportunities to
explore and reflect as a learning community of new science teachers upon their students’
work in order to improve both student and teacher performance. New science teachers
can share ideas and learn from each other how to assess student learning and analyze
their teaching based on assessment data.
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 42
Individualized on-site support provided by a retired science teacher is needed as
well. As a retired teacher, the coaches no longer have their own lesson planning and
grading needs. Instead, the coaches are able to expend their thoughts and energy on
helping their assigned new science teachers to plan instruction and grade student work.
New science teachers are frequently overwhelmed by their job. As a result, planning can
suffer. Coaches must be willingly to point out new science teachers’ lack of planning and
to insist upon lesson plans when they visit the new science teacher. Also, coaches need to
be knowledgeable and adept in using various types of assessment to drive instruction.
Sometimes, coaches will need to be trained in standards-based, assessment-driven
instruction if they have not taught in a “high stakes testing” environment.
Instruction
New science teachers in the program had specific instructional needs that centered
on their ability to focus their lessons, differentiate instruction, and effectively utilize
laboratory experiences with students. There are specific ways in which programs can help
new science teachers’ planning efforts. As with classroom management and planning,
new science teachers need both group formal support as well as individualized support in
their schools.
Basic science methods training must assume that new science teachers have not
been taught science via a hands-on inquiry-based approach. By providing multiple
opportunities for them to experience first-hand this approach to science teaching, new
science teachers need to critically reflect on the effectiveness of hands-on inquiry-based
instruction together. Once the academic year has started, new science teachers need to
critically reflect together on laboratory teaching materials and the impact of hands-on
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 43
inquiry-based instruction on student learning. With respect to differentiation, lesson
planning efforts in basic science methods should include differentiation as a requirement,
but intensive focus on differentiation strategies should be postponed until advanced
science methods training, preferably during the new science teachers’ second year of
teaching and participation in the support program.
Individualized support provided by a retired science teacher can be particularly
helpful in helping teachers make instructional progress. Through monitoring lesson plans
and providing feedback based on direct observation, coaches can help new science
teachers develop a focus for their lessons so that lessons become more student-centered.
As retired science teachers, coaches need training in how to help their assigned teachers
make the nature of science explicit to their students since this has grown in emphasis
within the last decade. Coaches also need training in the latest technologies utilized in
schools to teach inquiry-based science. So that coaches can better understand and guide
new science teachers in how to effectively use technology with students, coaches need to
observe experienced science teachers effectively use it with students.
General Recommendations
When considering new science teachers’ needs collectively in the areas of
classroom management, planning, and instruction, the following general
recommendations should be considered when developing programs to support new
science teachers:
1. There is not a one-size-fits-all model for supporting new teachers. Teachers need both
group support via methods coursework as well as individual support in their schools.
Findings indicate the importance of science methods coursework, in-class coaching
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 44
support by experienced science teachers, pedagogical support by fellow teachers, and
content knowledge support by university science faculty.
2. Retired science teachers can serve as a resource for training new science teachers.
Especially if retirees are from the same school division as the new teacher, retirees
can help new science teachers become more comfortable with school culture.
3. New science teachers need opportunities to reflect on their teaching practice to
support change. New science teachers can support each other during their methods
coursework, but retired science teachers can provide new science teachers with a
wealth of wisdom. A drop in self-efficacy does not mean that the new teacher is
teaching poorly. Indeed, reflective teachers may have reduced self-efficacy as they
become more aware of the needs of their students. New science teachers should be
reminded that teaching is an ongoing growth experience. As teachers develop as
professionals, reflective practice should be augmented by data collected on their
students’ learning for the purpose of improving their teaching and student learning.
While teachers are expected to perform well from the moment they enter the
classroom, teachers must accept the fact that learning to teach well takes time.
4. Science teachers need support specific to their content area. Laboratory set-up
requires the support of knowledgeable, experience individuals capable of guiding the
new teacher as they plan, set-up, monitor, and reflect on inquiry-based, hands-on
learning experiences utilized during class. Retired science teachers must help new
science teachers maintain safety during their instruction.
5. Content methods coursework should exist in two semesters to better fit the evolving
needs of science teachers as they gain classroom experience. In the first methods
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 45
course, the foci should include standards, curriculum mapping, lesson planning,
assessment tied to objectives, and the effective use of inquiry-based hands-on
learning. In the second methods course, the foci should include adaptations for
diverse learners and the use of technology to teach inquiry-based hands-on science.
Reflective practice must be a component of both courses so that the new teachers
reflect on their teaching efforts in terms of student learning.
For Further Thought
1. What are policy implications regarding the needs of provisional teachers and
students?
a. What are provisional teachers’ biggest challenges?
b. What kinds of support do teachers need to best impact student outcomes?
c. Are coaches or mentors more cost-effective? Why?
d. How can we protect new teachers during their survival mode?
2. How effective are qualitative methods in studying this policy problem?
References
[1] Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters, what leaders
can do. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 6-13.
[2] National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century.
(2000). Before it’s too late. U.S. Department of Education. Online at:
http://www.ed.gov/americacounts/glenn.
[3] Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of
state policy evidence. University of Washington: Center for the Study of Teaching and
Policy. Online at: http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/LDH_1999.pdf.
[4] Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of
state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). Available at:
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 46
[5] Ingersoll, R. (2000). Turnover Among Mathematics and Science Teachers in the U.S.
Online at: http://www.ed.gov/inits/Math/glenn/Ingersollp.doc
[6] National Science Teachers Association (2000, April 7). High turnover of science
teachers requires schools to change. Online at: http://www.nsta.org/survey3/
[7] Ingersoll, R. (2001). Teacher turnover, teacher shortages, and the organization of
schools. Online at: http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/Turnover-Ing-01-2001.pdf
[8] Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into
discussions of teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Online at:
http://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/PICTEAMAT.pdf
[9] Glaser, B.G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of
grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
[10] Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies
for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co. [11] Strauss, A.L., & Corbin, J.M.
(1998). Basics of qualitative research : Techniques and procedures for developing
grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
[12] Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
[13] Commonwealth of Virginia (2003) Science Standards of Learning for Virginia
Public Schools. Richmond, Virginia. Online at:
http://www.pen.k12.va.us/VDOE/Superintendent/Sols/ScienceSOL02.html
[14] National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
[15] Reeves, D.B. (2000). Accountability in action: A blueprint for learning
organizations. Denver, CO: Advanced Learning Press.
[16] Evertson, C. & Smithy, M. (2000). Mentoring effects on protégés’ classroom
practice: An experimental field study. Journal of Educational Research, 93, 294-304.
[17] Hurst, B. & Reding, G. (2003). Moving in the right direction: What to look for in an
effective teacher mentor – and how to be one. (Reprinted from Teachers Mentoring
Teachers, Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation booklet).
[18] Curwin, R.L. & Mendler, A.N. (1988). Discipline with dignity. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
[19] Marzano, R.J., Marzano, J.S., & Pickering, D.J. (2003). Classroom management that
works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
[20] Darling-Hammond, L. (2002). Learning to teach for social justice. In L. DarlingHammond, J. French, and S.P. Garcia-Lopez (Eds.), Learning To Teach For Social
Justice (pp. 1-8). New York: Teachers College Press.
[21] Delpit, L. (1995). Other people's children: Cultural conflicts in the classroom. New
York: The New Press.
[22] Fordham, S. & Ogbu, J. (1986). Black students' school success: Coping with the
burden of "acting White." Urban Review, 18, 176-206.
[23] Friere, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The Continuum Publishing
Company.
[24] Garcia, K. (2002). Swimming against the mainstream: Examining cultural
assumptions in the classroom. In L. Darling-Hammond, J. French, and S.P. Garcia-Lopez
(Eds.), Learning To Teach For Social Justice (pp. 22-29). New York: Teachers College
Press.
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 47
[25] Steele, J. (2002). Acknowledging diversity in the classroom. In L. DarlingHammond, J. French, and S.P. Garcia-Lopez (Eds.), Learning To Teach For Social
Justice (pp. 18-21). New York: Teachers College Press.
[26] Tatum, B.D. (1997). "Why are all the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?"
New York: Basic Books.
[27]Weiner, L. (1999). Urban teaching: The essentials. New York: Teachers College
Press.
[28] Frazier, W.M. & Sterling, D.R. (2005). What should my science classroom rules be
and how can I get my students to follow them? The Clearing House, 69, 31-35.
[29] National Science Teachers Association (1990). Position statement on laboratory
science. Online at: http://www.nsta.org/positionstatement&psid=16
[30] Brophy, J.E. & Evertson, C.M. (1976). Learning from teaching: A developmental
perspective. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
[31] Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., van Tartwijk, J., & Admiral, W. (1999). Interpersonal
relationships between teachers and students in the classroom. In H.C. Waxman & H.J.
Walbery (Eds.), New directions for teaching practice and research (pp. 151-170).
Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
[32] Jacobs, H.H. (1997). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum and
assessment K-12. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
[33] Luft, J., Roehrig, G. & Patterson, N. (2003). Contrasting landscapes: A comparison
of the impact of different induction programs on beginning secondary science teachers’
practices, beliefs, and experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 77-97.
[34] American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for
science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
[35] Bell, R., Lederman, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon
one’s conception of the nature of science: A follow-up study. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 37, 563-581.
[36] Lederman, N. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions about the nature of
science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331-359.
[37] Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of nature
of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’
conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497-521.
Author Biographies
DONNA R. STERLING is an Associate Professor of Science Education and Director of
the Center for Restructuring Education in Science and Technology (CREST) at George
Mason University. Dr. Sterling received her Doctorate of Education from George
Washington University. Her research interests span teacher professional development,
effective science teaching and learning, assessment, and leadership in science education.
WENDY M. FRAZIER is an Assistant Professor of Science Education and Assistant
Director of the Center for Restructuring Education in Science and Technology (CREST)
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 48
at George Mason University. Dr. Frazier received her Doctorate of Education from
Teachers College, Columbia University. Her research interests include elementary and
secondary science teacher training, equity issues in science education, and integrated
science curriculum development to support extended student investigations.
MOLLIANNE G. LOGERWELL is pursuing a doctorate in science education leadership
and educational policy at George Mason University. Mrs. Logerwell also works as a
graduate research assistant in the Center for Restructuring Education in Science and
Technology (CREST). She received her M.A.Ed. in Secondary Science and Gifted
Education at The College of William and Mary and has taught chemistry in Fairfax
County public schools for nine years.
ANASTASIA KITSANTAS is an Associate Professor of Educational Psychology at
George Mason University. Dr. Kitsantas received her PhD from the Graduate Center of
the City University of New York in 1996. Her research interests include research on
social cognitive processes, self-regulation and motivation, and teaching excellence
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 49
Figure 1. Emergent categories with respect to new science teachers’ classroom management
Classroom
Management
Physical
Environment
Room
Set-up
Routines and
Policies
Teacher’s
Schedule
Something
Worth Doing
Planning
Interactions
with Students
Materials
Instruction
Communication
Monitoring
Enforcement
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 50
Figure 2. Emergent categories with respect to new science teacher’s planning efforts
Planning
Content
Standards
Connections
Organization
and Filing
Instruction
Lab
Experiences
Lack of
Planning
Pacing
Variety
Assessment
Format
Donna Sterling, Wendy Frazier, Mollianne Logerwell & Anastasia Kitsantas 51
Figure 3. Emergent categories with respect to new science teachers’ instructional skills
Instruction
Teacher
Focus
Lesson
Differentiation
TeacherDirected
Student
TeacherFacilitated
Professional
Dispositions
Active
Learning
Safety
Passive
Learning