Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Becoming a physics teacher: Disciplinary discourses and the development of professional identity
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Centre for Gender Research.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6265-0004
2019 (English)Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In this Licentiate thesis I examine the system of physics teacher education. Physics teacher education is important because it is one of the main ways to influence how physics is taught in schools. By extension, physics teacher education has the potential to affect both who chooses to pursue physics as a career and how physics is perceived by Swedish society as a whole. In order to approach this problem, I chose to investigate the professional discourses of Swedish physics teacher educators. I focus on how these discourses potentially afford and constrain trainees’ possibilities of performing a professional physics teacher identity. While the topic of teacher identity has been extensively explored in the literature, the influence of the educational environment on what it means to become a physics teacher has remained very sparsely researched. Theoretically, I view identity as socially constructed in discourse. I connect identity to trainee learning by arguing that what trainees learn will be dependent on their possibilities to perform professional physics teacher identities in their educational programme. Using discourse analysis of interviews with physics teacher educators, I identify four discourse models. These four models paint a picture of the educational program as fragmented with no coherent way of viewing the educational program as a whole. I further suggest that the culture of physics departments plays a pivotal role in the success or otherwise of creating good quality physics teacher education. I demonstrate how an implicit assumption, that the purpose of teaching physics is to create physics experts, appears to unintentionally undermine and devalue physics teacher education within physics departments. The findings presented in this thesis have the potential to inspire teacher educators and physics faculty to examine their own assumptions about what the goal of physics teaching is, and to facilitate the negotiations needed to create a common understanding of the goals of the physics teacher education.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala, 2019. , p. 108
Keywords [en]
physics teacher education, discourse analysis, professional identity
National Category
Physical Sciences Educational Sciences
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-397002OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-397002DiVA, id: diva2:1371298
Presentation
2020-01-15, Room Å80121, Ångströmlaboratoriet, Lägerhyddsvägen 1, Uppsala, 10:15 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2019-12-09 Created: 2019-11-19 Last updated: 2019-12-09Bibliographically approved
List of papers
1. Developing Students’ Disciplinary Literacy?: The Case of University Physics
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Developing Students’ Disciplinary Literacy?: The Case of University Physics
2018 (English)In: Global Developments in Literacy Research for Science Education / [ed] Kok-Sing Tang, Kristina Danielsson, Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018, p. 357-376Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The main data set used in this chapter comes from a comparative study of physics

lecturers in Sweden and South Africa. (Airey 2012; 2013: Linder et al 2014). Semistructured

interviews were carried out using a disciplinary literacy discussion matrix

(Airey 2011b), which enabled us to probe the lecturers’ disciplinary literacy goals in the

various semiotic resource systems used in undergraduate physics (i.e. graphs, diagrams,

mathematics, language, etc.).

The findings suggest that whilst physics lecturers have strikingly similar

disciplinary literacy goals for their students, regardless of setting; they have very different

ideas about whether they themselves should teach students to handle these disciplinaryspecific

semiotic resources. It is suggested that the similarity in physics

lecturers’disciplinary literacy goals across highly disparate settings may be related to the

hierarchical, singular nature of the discipline of physics (Bernstein 1999; 2000).

In the final section of the chapter some preliminary evidence about the disciplinary

literacy goals of those involved in physics teacher training is presented. Using Bernstein’s

constructs, a potential conflict between the hierarchical singular of physics and the

horizontal region of teacher training is noticeable.

Going forward it would be interesting to apply the concept of disciplinary literacy

to the analysis of other disciplines—particularly those with different combinations of

Bernstein’s classifications of hierarchical/horizontal and singular/region.

References

Airey, J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala  Retrieved 2009-04-27, from http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

Airey, J. (2011a). The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education. Across the disciplines, 8(3).

Airey, J. (2011b). Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education: Disciplinary Literacy and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Dynamic content and language collaboration in higher education: theory, research, and reflections (pp. 57-65). Cape Town, South Africa: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25(2012), 64–79.

Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik (pp. 41-58): Gleerups.

Airey, J. (2015). Social Semiotics in Higher Education: Examples from teaching and learning in undergraduate physics In: SACF Singapore-Sweden Excellence Seminars, Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research in Higher Education (STINT), 2015 (pp. 103). urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-266049.

Airey, J., & Larsson, J. (2014). What Knowledge Do Trainee Physics Teachers Need to Learn? Differences in the Views of Training Staff. International Science Education Conference ISEC 2014, National Institute of Education, Singapore. 25-27 November 2014.

Airey, J., Lauridsen, K., Raisanen, A., Salö, L., & Schwach, V. (2016). The Expansion of English medium Instruction in the Nordic Countries. Can Top-down University Language Policies Encourage Bottom-up Disciplinary Literacy Goals? Higher Education. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-015-9950-2

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2008). Bilingual Scientific Literacy? The use of English in Swedish university science programmes. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 7(3), 145-161.

Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2011). Bilingual scientific literacy. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. Roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. Ericksen & A. MacKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 106-124). London: Routledge.

Airey, J. & Linder, C. (in press) Social Semiotics in University Physics Education. In D. Treagust, R. Duit, R. & H. Fischer (Eds.), Multiple Representations in Physics Education Springer.

American Association of Physics Teachers. (1996). Physics at the crossroads   Retrieved from http://www.aapt.org/Events/crossroads.cfm

Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (1989). Academic Tribes and Territories. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Bennett, K. (2010). Academic discourse in Portugal: A whole different ballgame? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 21-32.

Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology Education, 20(2), 157-173.

Bernstein, B. (2000). pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research and critique. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

Björk, L., & Räisänen, C. A. (2003). Academic Writing: A university writing course (3 ed.). Lund: studentlitteratur.

Bogdan, R. C., and Biklen, S. R. 1992. Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

CHE-SAIP. (2013).  Review of undergraduate physics education in public higher education institutions. http://www.saip.org.za/images/stories/documents/documents/Undergrad_Physics_Report_Final.pdf

Duff, P. (2010). Language socialization into academic discourse communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30(March 2010), 169-192.

European Commission Expert Group. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

Forsman, J. (2015). Complexity Theory and Physics Education Research: The Case of Student Retention in Physics and Related Degree Programmes. Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Retrieved from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A846064&dswid=-4668

Fortanet-Gomez, I. (2013). CLIL in Higher Education. Towards a Multilingual Language Policy. Bristol UK: Multilingual Matters.

Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2012). Exploring the role of physics representations: an illustrative example from students sharing knowledge about refraction. European Journal of Physics, 33, 657-666.

Fredlund, T., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Linder, A. (2014). Unpacking physics representations: Towards an appreciation of disciplinary affordance. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., 10(020128 (2014)).

Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2015). Enhancing the possibilities for learning: Variation of disciplinary-relevant aspects in physics representations. European Journal of Physics, 36(5), 055001.

Gee, J. P. (1991). What is literacy? In C. Mitchell & K. Weiler (Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other (pp. 3-11). New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (pp. 127-143). Boston: Houghton Miffin.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). The analysis of scientific texts in English and Chinese. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 124-132). London: Falmer Press.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press.

Hurd, P. d. H. (1958). Science literacy: Its meaning for American schools. Educational Leadership, 16, 13-16.

Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and Identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.

Johannsen, B. F. (2013). Attrition and retention in university physics: A longitudinal qualitative study of the interaction between first year students and the study of physics (Doctoral dissertation, University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Science, Department of Science Education).

Josephson, O. (2005). Parallellspråkighet [parallel language use]. Språkvård, 2005(1), 3.

Korpan, C. A., Bisanz, G. L., Bisanz, J., & Henderson, J. M. (1997). Assessing literacy in science: Evaluation of scientific news briefs. Science Education. Science Education, 81, 515-532.

Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.

Kuteeva, M., & Airey, J. (2014). Disciplinary Differences in the Use of English in Higher Education: Reflections on Recent Policy Developments  Higher Education 67(5), 533-549.

Larsson, J., & Airey, J. (2014). Searching for stories: The training environment as a constituting factor in the professional identity work of future physics teachers. British Educational Research Association Conference BERA 2014, London, September 2014.

Larsson, J., & Airey, J. (2015). The "physics expert" discourse model – counterproductive for trainee physics teachers' professional identity building? Paper presented at the 11th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA) Helsinki, August 31 to September 4, 2015.

Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84:, 71–94.

Lea, M. R., & Street, B.V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157-172.

Lemke, J. L. (1998). Teaching all the languages of science: Words, symbols, images, and actions  Retrieved September 16, 2005, from http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/education/jlemke/papers/barcelon.htm

Lillis, T., & Scott, M. (2007). Defining academic literacies research: issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(4), 5–32.

Linder, A., Airey, J., Mayaba, N., & Webb, P. (2014). Fostering Disciplinary Literacy? South African Physics Lecturers’ Educational Responses to their Students’ Lack of Representational Competence. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(3), 242-252. doi:10.1080/10288457.2014.953294

Martin, J. R. (2011). Bridging troubled waters: Interdisciplinarity and what makes it stick. In F. Christie & K. Maton (Eds.), Disciplinarity (pp. 35-61). London: Continuum International Publishing.

Moje, E. B. (2007). Developing Socially Just Subject-Matter Instruction: A Review of the Literature on Disciplinary Literacy Teaching. Review of Research in Education 31(March 2007), 1–44.

McDermott, L. (1990). A view from physics. In M. Gardner, J. G. Greeno, F. Reif, A. H. Schoenfeld, A. A. diSessa, & E. Stage (Eds.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

National Research Council. (2013). Adapting to a Changing World --- Challenges and Opportunities in Undergraduate Physics Education. Committee on Undergraduate Physics Education Research and Implementation. Board on Physics and Astronomy Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

Nordic Educational Research Association. (2009). Literacy as worldmaking. Congress of the Nordic Educational Research Association: Available from http://www.neracongress2009.com.

Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240.

Northedge, A. (2002). Organizing excursions into specialist discourse communities: A sociocultural account of university teaching. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century. Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 252-264). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Parodi, G. (2012) University Genres and Multisemiotic Features: Accessing Specialized Knowledge Through Disciplinarity. Fórum Linguístico. 9:4, 259-282.

Phillipson, R. (2006). English, a cuckoo in the European higher education nest of languages. European Journal of English Studies, 10(1), 13–32.

Roberts, D. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy: Threats and opportunities. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729-780). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disciplinary literacy and why does it matter?. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7-18.

Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swales, J., & Feak, C. (2004). Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Tang, K. S. K., Ho, C., & Putra, G. B. S. (2016). Developing Multimodal Communication Competencies: A Case of Disciplinary Literacy Focus in Singapore. In Using Multimodal Representations to Support Learning in the Science Classroom (pp. 135-158). Springer International Publishing.

UNESCO. (2004). The Plurality of Literacy and its Implications for Policies and Programmes. Paris: UNESCO.

Wickman, P.-O., & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86(5), 601-623. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018
Keywords
Disciplinary Literacy, Undergraduate physics, Higher education, Physics teacher education, knowledge structures, singulars, regions
National Category
Other Physics Topics Educational Sciences
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-340015 (URN)10.1007/978-3-319-69197-8_21 (DOI)978-3-319-69197-8 (ISBN)
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2015-01891
Available from: 2018-01-25 Created: 2018-01-25 Last updated: 2019-11-19
2. A Fragmented Training Environment: Discourse Models in the Talk of Physics Teacher Educators
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A Fragmented Training Environment: Discourse Models in the Talk of Physics Teacher Educators
2018 (English)In: Research in science education, ISSN 0157-244X, E-ISSN 1573-1898Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

This article reports the results of an empirical study exploring the discourses of physics teacher educators. We ask how the expressed understandings of a physics teacher education programme in the talk of teacher educators potentially support the identity construction of new teachers. Nine teacher educators from different sections of a physics teacher programme in Sweden were interviewed. The concept of discourse models was used to operationalise how the discourses of the teacher education programme potentially enable the performance of different physics teacher identities. The analysis resulted in the construction of four discourse models that could be seen to be both enabling and limiting the kinds of identity performances trainee physics teachers can enact. Knowledge of the models thus potentially empowers trainee physics teachers to understand the different goals of their educational programme and from there make informed choices about their own particular approach to becoming a professional physics teacher. We also suggest that for teacher educators, knowledge of the discourse models could facilitate making conscious, informed decisions about their own teaching practice.

Keywords
Teacher education, Physics, Discourse, Identity
National Category
Educational Sciences Physical Sciences Gender Studies
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-370078 (URN)10.1007/s11165-018-9793-9 (DOI)
Available from: 2018-12-18 Created: 2018-12-18 Last updated: 2019-11-19Bibliographically approved
3. Swimming against the tide: Four myths about teacher education sustained by the culture of physics
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Swimming against the tide: Four myths about teacher education sustained by the culture of physics
(English)Manuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In this paper we discuss how the culture of physics potentially affects physics teacher education. Our interest in this topic was initially motivated by the pessimistic description of the status of US physics teacher education reported by the Task Force on Teacher Education in Physics (T-TEP). The report suggests an eminently sensible range of measures that may be taken by physics departments to aid recruitment of well-qualified physics teachers. However, the authors of the report also point out that similar suggestions have been made in various reports over the last 130 years. In this paper, we suggest that the physics community needs to ask why measures that have been repeatedly recommended have seldom been acted upon within physics departments. We suggest that the culture of physics could potentially play a pivotal role in the success or otherwise of the report’s proposals. Inspired by the T-TEP report and our earlier findings that suggest that physics departments may be unintentionally working against the recruitment and retention of high-quality physics teachers, we decided to look more deeply into the issue of the effects of physics culture on physics teacher training. To do this we analyzed data from interviews with seventeen physics teacher educators at four Swedish universities. The study demonstrates how the talk of physicists in the contexts we studied does indeed appear to unintentionally undermine and devalue physics teacher education. Our analysis suggests that one facet of the culture of Swedish physics departments is the basic underlying assumption that the purpose of all undergraduate physics teaching is to create physics experts. This assumption leads to four ‘myths’ about trainee physics teachers and school physics. These are the Goal Myth—The role of a school physics teacher is to create new physicists, the Content Myth—The content of school physics is simple, uninteresting and inherently unproblematic, the Student Myth—Students who decide to become physics teachers do so because they don’t have the ability to make it as successful physicists and the Teaching Myth—It is not really necessary to learn how to teach physics. If we want the best physics teachers possible, then any tacit attitudes to physics teacher education similar to the ones signaled by these four myths need to be challenged. We should not expect good physics students who want to become teachers to “swim against the tide”.

Keywords
Teacher education, Physics, Discourse, Identity
National Category
Physical Sciences Educational Sciences
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-397001 (URN)
Available from: 2019-11-13 Created: 2019-11-13 Last updated: 2019-11-19

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1477 kB)87 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1477 kBChecksum SHA-512
678d9d655b9efe431e0599d707c9751856b2bc6b7b1ae4fdec92038f337573e381eba48f8f15f4c58d452998f6f6982d4d78031a2b049a3316ae0bd554903197
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Larsson, Johanna
By organisation
Physics DidacticsCentre for Gender Research
Physical SciencesEducational Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 87 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 369 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf