Assessing Science Teaching Explanations in Initial Teacher Education: How Is This Teaching Practice Transferred Across Different Chemistry Topics?

Exploring Pre-Service Chemistry Teachers’ Pedagogical Scientific Language Knowledge

“…Formulating explanations for fictitious others has been reported by Lachner and Neuburg [60] as a constructive learning activity since the pre-service chemistry teachers need to adapt their explanations to the needs of the fictitious students and transform their knowledge in a way that the information gets tangible to the students. Constructing a subject-adequate explanation requires sufficient CK that is mediated by PCK on the topic, which has a positive influence on explaining performance [61][62][63]. Therefore, the given grade level means for the pre-service chemistry teachers to adapt the explanation to the level of the students (language use and content level), consider possible preconceptions and (future) misconceptions, and different representational levels where appropriate, think about the structure of the explanation and reasoning, and consider the use of examples, experiments, analogies, etc.…”

“…Therefore, the given grade level means for the pre-service chemistry teachers to adapt the explanation to the level of the students (language use and content level), consider possible preconceptions and (future) misconceptions, and different representational levels where appropriate, think about the structure of the explanation and reasoning, and consider the use of examples, experiments, analogies, etc. [62,64]. One difficulty when explaining is that the pre-service chemistry teachers must be aware that language itself can be difficult for students so that the pre-service chemistry teachers use (scientific) language consciously, which becomes apparent through the clarity, coherence and cohesion, sequence, and correctness of the explanation [64].…”

Pre-service teachers' conceptions about the quality of explanations for the science classroom in the context of peer assessment

“…However, constructing explanations is a complicated process, and many teachers struggle to transform academic knowledge into explanations for the school (Cabello, Real, & Impedovo, 2019;Charalambous, Hill, & Ball, 2011;Gobierno de Chile, 2013;Hadzidaki, 2008;Kulgemeyer, et al, 2020;Inoue, 2009;Wittwer & Renkl, 2008). Indeed, this is even more critical for beginner teachers (Leinhardt, 2001;Ospina-Quintero & Bonan, 2011;Marzabal et al, 2019), and practical experience without reflection is unlikely to automatically lead to better results in explaining. Practical experience of working as a science teacher helps pre-service teachers to become aware of how difficult it is to be a good explainer (Kulgemeyer & Riese, 2018).…”

“…Those difficulties might be due to the lack of opportunities for practising and reflecting on explanations during initial teacher education (Charalambous et al, 2011;Inoue, 2009;Marzabal et al, 2019). Moreover, the research regarding studentteacher explanations is still not as developed as the studies focused on student explanations (e.g., Besson, 2010;Herman et al, 2019;Kampourakis & Zogza, 2008).…”

“…Moreover, the research regarding studentteacher explanations is still not as developed as the studies focused on student explanations (e.g., Besson, 2010;Herman et al, 2019;Kampourakis & Zogza, 2008). Hence, the intersection of explanation construction and the factors affecting its development in teacher education is still an under-researched field of inquiry (Charalambous et al, 2011;Geelan, 2012;Kulgemeyer & Riese, 2018;Kulgemeyer et al, 2020;Marzabal et al, 2019). Therefore, there is little knowledge about the development of pre-service explanations and relevance for future classroom practice.…”