- Open Access
Characteristics of effective astronomer-educator partnerships in formal urban middle school science classrooms
Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 010147 – Published 15 June, 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010147
Abstract
[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Astronomy Education Research.] This qualitative study investigates astronomers’ and urban public middle school teachers’ beliefs about the characteristics of effective outreach partnerships in formal science classroom settings. Twelve astronomers and twelve science teachers participating in Baltimore Project ASTRO, a NSF grant-funded astronomer-educator partnership outreach program, were interviewed after participation using semistructured, in-depth interview techniques. Constant comparative analysis was used to analyze the interview transcripts. The findings suggest that astronomers and urban public middle school teachers believe that the characteristics of effective outreach partnerships center on the following three themes: partnership collaboration, astronomer and teacher characteristics, and astronomer and teacher dispositions. Regarding partnership collaboration, astronomers and teachers believed that establishing a relationship; maintaining communication; planning, preparing, and facilitating lessons collaboratively; and following up on lessons taught and modifying lessons for future implementation were vital characteristics for effective astronomer-educator partnerships. Concerning astronomer and teacher characteristics, effective astronomer partners were described as being willing to volunteer their time, willing to provide resources, and willing to purchase supplies. Effective educator partners were characterized as being responsible for managing the classroom and students, differentiating lessons and activities, and administering pre- and postastronomy assessments to students before and after their astronomer partner visits. In reference to astronomer and teacher dispositions, effective astronomers were prompt, able to relate to kids, exited, passionate about what they do, knowledgeable, tolerant, and easy going. Effective teachers were committed, motivated to have a volunteer astronomer in their classroom, passionate about teaching and about their students, and knowledgeable about the astronomy curriculum. The findings of this study help to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the characteristics of effective astronomer-educator partnerships in formal urban middle school science classrooms and help to provide essential guidance to all who are interested in designing and facilitating such science educational outreach programming.
Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)
Collections
This article appears in the following collection:
Astronomy Education Research
A special collection highlighting the current state of the field of physics education research as it relates to astronomy education research.
Article Text
References (22)
- A. L. Luehman and D. Markowitz, Science teachers’ perceived benefits of an out-of-school enrichment programme: Identity needs and university affordances, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 29, 1133 (2007).
- R. J. Miranda, Urban middle-school science teachers’ beliefs about the influence of their astronomer-educator partnerships on students’ astronomy learner characteristics, Astron. Educ. Rev. 11, 010101–1 (2012).
- M. C. Linn, L. Shear, P. Bell, and J. D. Slotta, Organizing principles for science education partnerships: Case studies of students’ learning about rats in space and deformed frogs, Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 47, 61 (1999).
- M. Munn, P. O. Skinner, L. Conn, H. G. Horsma, and P. Gregory, The involvement of genome researchers in high school science education, Genome Res. 9, 597 (1999).
- G. Wheeler, The wake-up call we dare not to ignore, Science 279, 1611 (1998).
- N. Brickhouse, Teacher beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice, J. Teach. Educ. 41, 53 (1990).
- C. Briscoe, The dynamic interactions among beliefs, role metaphors, and teaching practices: A case study of teacher change, Sci. Educ. 75, 185 (1991).
- L. Bryan, Nestedness of beliefs: examining a prospective elementary teacher’s belief system about science teaching and learning, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 40, 835 (2003).
- J. Nespor, The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching, J. Curric. Stud. 19, 317 (1987).
- M. Pajares, Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct, Rev. Educ. Res. 62, 307 (1992).
- L. Bryan and M. Atwater, Teacher beliefs and cultural models: A challenge for science teacher education programs, Sci. Educ. 86, 821 (2002).
- S. R. Herwitz and M. Guerra, Perspectives, partnerships, and values in science education: A university and public elementary school collaboration, Sci. Educ. 80, 21 (1996).
- R. J. Miranda, Urban public high school teachers’ beliefs about science learner characteristics: Implications for curriculum, Urban Educ. 41, 506 (2006).
- R. J. Miranda, Urban middle school teachers’ beliefs about science learner characteristics: Implications for astronomy curriculum, Astron. Educ. Rev. 9, 010117–1 (2010).
- F. J. Rutherford and A. Ahlgren, Science for All Americans (Oxford University Press, New York, 1990).
- M. G. Gibbs and M. Berendson, Effectiveness of amateur astronomers as informal science educators, Astron. Educ. Rev. 5, 114 (2007).
- A. Fraknoi, M. Bennett, and J. Richter, Project ASTRO: A successful model for Astronomer/Teacher partnerships in New Trends in Astronomy Teaching edited by L. Gougeuenheim, D. McNally, and J. R. Percy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1998).
- L. P. Connolly, NAS Gives Rise to ASTRO, Mercury 26, 6 (1997).
- M. Patton, Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 1990).
- J. P. Spradley, The Ethnographic Interview (Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, New York, 1979).
- J. M. Corbin and A. L. Strauss, Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (Sage, United Kingdom 2008).
- D. Tomanek, Building successful partnerships between K–12 and universities, Cell Biol. Educ. 4, 28 (2005).
