What do you remember most vividly about your high school chemistry class? Reading the textbook? Taking multiple-choice exams? For most, the hands-on laboratory sessions left the biggest impact. Likely this is because lessons that prompt students to actively participate in their own learning are more engaging than those that only require students to passively ingest information. Curriculum and instruction professor Gillian Roehrig adamantly agrees; she believes students learn best through inquiry-based instruction--a model of teaching that puts students in charge of designing their own education.

During Roehrig's first year as a secondary chemistry teacher in Tucson, the only evaluation of her teaching consisted of a Post-It note inscribed with "Great job." The note failed to quell Roehrig's insecurities about her teaching; she only felt more frustrated after reading the ambiguous message. "I just never knew if I was doing a good job," she said. As a new teacher, she was facing standard obstacles like teaching out of a small, ill-equipped classroom nicknamed the bat cave. Roehrig, like all new teachers, needed more feedback and instruction on how to manage her classroom, plan lessons, and engage her students. But more importantly she craved support relating to her unique needs as a science teacher.

Taking the reformist's approach, Roehrig transferred her skills to the university setting--one where she could help new science teachers by researching induction programs, which aim to mentor and assist new teachers. By understanding the needs of new science teachers, she could conceivably solve for others the frustrations she faced as a new teacher and help science teachers use inquiry-based instruction. As students in the U.S. continue to fall short of their international peers in science and math, well-prepared teachers who can intrigue them in these subjects are essential.

While working on her Ph.D. at the University of Arizona, Roehrig co-developed and implemented workshops and in-classroom support for beginning secondary science teachers. Now she is initiating a similar program in Minnesota. Teachers with a B.A. who come to the University for a teaching license or an M.Ed. can participate in an induction program which consists of monthly face-to-face classes where students can discuss teaching issues with mentors and participate in laboratory assignments. An online section is also available to give support to teachers in rural Minnesota.

Roehrig is also expanding on her previous research with Julie A. Luft from the University of Texas, Austin. They are working on designing optimal induction programs to retain and support new science teachers by exploring the development of these teachers in various types of programs.

Science as inquiry

Students who practice inquiry in the classroom develop abstract, conceptual thinking skills and the ability to apply those skills to complex real-world problems. They make observations; pose questions; plan investigations; and gather, analyze, and interpret data. And Roehrig believes students should author their own laboratory sessions. "You wouldn't be following a recipe," she said. "We want students to think scientifically. Students learn a few key concepts in-depth rather than trying to memorize an entire textbook and miss the application of the content."

Teachers with student-centered educational beliefs tend to enact inquiry-based lessons, resulting in students who actively construct their own knowledge. Conversely, teacher-centered beliefs stress the factual and descriptive aspects of science, where the teacher traditionally organizes the material for the student. Roehrig and Luft have found that beginning science teachers who participate in science-focused induction programs tend to align toward student-centered beliefs.

However, teachers who have adopted student-centered beliefs while in an induction program may still face constraints that deter them from teaching inquiry-based lessons. "Even teachers who learned inquiry-based models still have to focus on accountability and mandated testing which tends to force them into traditional teaching roles," said Roehrig.

In addition, a science teacher's ability to engage in inquiry-based instruction depends upon knowledge of the subject matter, curriculum, and pedagogical content. Teachers with limited content knowledge are more likely to rely on texts and prescribed curricular materials which often lack an inquiry-based orientation. Roehrig and her colleagues are examining ways to troubleshoot these roadblocks as they research optimal program design.

Induction programs

The constraints faced by beginning science teachers--lack of direction in planning labs, gaps in subject knowledge, and classroom management problems--can be overwhelming, sometimes forcing these teachers out of the profession and into the private sector. But a supportive induction program can serve as a beacon. "Less undergraduate science students overall choose teaching, and those who do need a supportive induction program to stay in teaching," said Roehrig.

Induction programs vary significantly--from a one-day orientation by district personnel to a three-year program developed by school personnel and university staff that aids in the ongoing development of beginning teachers. Mentoring programs, which emphasize general classroom management and lesson planning, are the dominant model of support for beginning teachers in the U.S. To Roehrig, an ideal type of induction program combines general support with ongoing subject-specific support that target a science teacher's unique subject-related pedagogical and content needs and that reinforces the importance of science as inquiry--a model rarely found in the United States.

In recent research, Roehrig and her colleagues found that teachers who participate in a science-focused induction program enact more inquiry-based lessons, hold beliefs that align with student-centered practices, and feel fewer constraints in their teaching than teachers in general induction programs or no induction program. Unfortunately, most school districts can't afford these programs. "They just aren't financially efficient when a district maybe only has five new science teachers in a given year," Roehrig explained.

A timely project

Roehrig and Luft's current project is funded by a National Science Foundation grant. During the pilot phase, 40 first-year secondary science teachers with student populations that are culturally, ethnically, and economically diverse will be studied while participating in four different types of induction programs. In the formal study, 120 first-year secondary science teachers will be followed for three years--two years in an induction program and a third year after the induction experience.

Beyond the broad question of how various induction programs impact the development of beginning science teachers, the group will look at how induction programs impact the retention of beginning science teachers, what induction program configurations optimally support beginning secondary science teachers, and how external factors such as colleagues and mandated testing impact teacher development. Currently, Roehrig is piloting instruments to measure content knowledge in teachers and interviews to understand teachers' beliefs about teaching and how scientists do their work.

When the team concludes their research, they will begin disseminating their findings--the most critical goal of the project. Locally, they will share information with school district administrators and professional development specialists who are involved with beginning science teachers. Regionally and nationally, they will share findings via conferences, publications, National Advisory Committee members, and Web sites.

In the last ten years, the number of induction programs nationwide has increased. This increase is due to growing concern about the attrition, retention, and performance of teachers-factors impacting the achievement of students. As students all over the world continue to out-perform American students in science and math, Roehrig and Luft's research is not only timely, but also imperative for preparing teachers to help students meet the world's rigorous competition head-on.

WRITTEN BY AMY DANIELSON