J Sci Teacher Educ (2015) 26:695–713

DOI 10.1007/s10972-015-9445-0

Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs,

Practice, and Change Related to Inquiry-Based
Instruction of One Science Teacher

Kimberly Lebak1

Published online: 5 January 2016

 The Association for Science Teacher Education, USA 2015

Abstract This case study examines the complex relationship between beliefs,
practice, and change related to inquiry-based instruction of one science teacher
teaching in a high-poverty urban school. This study explores how video-supported
collaboration with peers can provide the catalyst for change. Transcribed collabo-
rative dialogue sessions, written self-reflections, and videotapes of lessons were
used to identify and isolate the belief systems that were critical to the teacher’s
decision making. The Interconnected Model of Professional Growth was then used
to trace the trajectories of change of the individual belief systems. Analysis of the
data revealed the relationship between beliefs and practices was complex in which
initially espoused beliefs were often inconsistent with enacted practice and some
beliefs emerged as more salient than others for influencing practice. Furthermore,
this research indicates change in both beliefs and practice was an interactive process
mediated by collaborative and self-reflection through participation in the video-
supported process.

Keywords Teacher beliefs
Teacher change
Inquiry instruction
Interconnected

Model of Professional Growth

Introduction

Reform documents in science education have advocated for years for teachers to
use inquiry-based instruction as a central pedagogical approach for students to learn
science (National Research Council [NRC], 1996, 2000). The benefits of inquiry-
based instruction have been well established including enhancing student motiva-
tion to learn science (Crawford, 2012) and overall greater student achievement in

& Kimberly Lebak

Kimberly.Lebak@stockton.edu
1
Stockton University, 101 Vera King Farris Drive, Galloway, NJ 08205-9441, USA

123
696 K. Lebak

science (Edelson, 1998). However, despite the calls for over a decade for teachers to
implement inquiry-based instruction in their classroom, teachers struggle to enact
reform-based approaches to teaching science. Capps and Crawford (2013) found
little evidence of aspects of inquiry in classrooms of even highly motivated, well-
qualified science teachers. In urban schools serving economically disadvantaged and
racially and ethnically diverse students, the opportunities for students to engage in
inquiry-based instruction decrease (Smith & Southerland, 2007) despite research
that points to the possibilities of inquiry instruction to engage underrepresented
students in science learning (Meyer & Crawford, 2011).
Studies have found teacher beliefs play a pivotal role in how teachers enact
science instruction in their classrooms (Bryan, 2003; Lee, Hart, Cuevas, & Enders,
2004). Beliefs can be linked to a teachers’ personal experience with inquiry, an
understanding of what science is, and an understanding of their own students (Capps
& Crawford, 2013; Nespor, 1987). Much of the research finds science teachers need
to hold beliefs regarding teaching and learning that are consistent with reform-based
practices (Capps & Crawford, 2013; Crawford, 2007; Roehrig & Luft, 2004).
Studies on teacher beliefs about students, learning, teaching, and the nature of
science have found beliefs impact teaching practices and can create barriers to the
implementation of scientific inquiry (Cronin-Jones, 1991; Lotter, Harwood, &
Bonner, 2007; Wallace & Kang, 2004). In urban schools, teacher beliefs on how
underrepresented students learn may be inconsistent with the use of inquiry-based
instruction creating constraints for implementation in the classroom (Mangiante,
2013).
Despite the plethora of studies on teacher beliefs, the nature of the relationship
between beliefs and science practice remains unclear. Some studies have found that
teacher espoused beliefs are consistent with enacted classroom practice (Cronin-
Jones, 1991; Haney & McArthur, 2002), while other studies have found
contradictions between teacher articulated beliefs and actual practice (Hancock &
Gallard, 2004; King, Shumow, & Lietz, 2001). Furthermore, factors that contribute
to change in beliefs and practices lack clarity (Mansour, 2009; Richardson, 1996).
Mansour (2009) asserts there is need to examine teachers’ beliefs to further clarify
how they affect practice. Similarly, Capps, Crawford, and Constas (2012)
recommend future research investigate the connection between participation in
professional development and changes in beliefs and practices.
This study aims to address gaps in the literature through examining the complex
relationship between beliefs, enacted practice, and teacher change related to
inquiry-based instruction of one science teacher teaching in a high-needs urban
school as he participates in a collaborative video-supported reflection process.
Specifically, this research uses the Interconnected Model of Professional Growth to
better understand how a teachers’ individual belief influence the implementation of
inquiry-based practice. Furthermore, this study seeks to understand the factors that
mediate change in individual beliefs and practice through participation in the video-
supported professional development model.

123
Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs… 697

Theoretical Framework

Teacher Beliefs and Inquiry-Based Instruction

Beliefs include understandings and assumptions thought to be true (Richardson,

1996). Bryan (2003) profiled six major categories of beliefs about science teaching
and learning which she found defined practice: (a) the value of science and science
teaching, (b) the nature of science and goals of science instruction, (c) control in the
science classroom, (d) how students learn science, (e) the students’ role in the
science classroom, and (f) the teacher’s role in the science classroom. In her study,
Bryan found the belief systems were complex system of beliefs that at times
contradicted one another but drove practice. Bryan found shifting instruction from a
traditional mode of instruction to a reformed-based approach required a significant
shift in the teacher’s belief system. Other studies have recognized the importance
for teachers to change their practice along with their beliefs (Guskey, 1986;
Rushton, Lotter, & Singer, 2011).
Professional development is often designed to support practicing teachers in
implementing inquiry-based instruction in science classrooms (Loucks-Horsley,
Love, Stiles, Mundry, & Hewson, 2003; NRC, 1996). Many teacher educators see
the goals of highly effective science professional development as providing
opportunities for teachers to change beliefs and classroom practice (Rushton et al.,
2011). However, researchers have found mixed results regarding the role
professional development plays in changing teacher beliefs and practices. One
reason professional development in science may not yield successful change is
existing beliefs can serve as frames that filter professional development opportu-
nities for teachers (Fives & Buehl, 2014) limiting the possibility of sustained
change. Furthermore, changing teacher beliefs specifically related to inquiry science
practice can be challenging as beliefs about inquiry-based practices are particularly
subject to a number of factors including content knowledge (Yilmaz-Tuzun, 2008),
affective states (Bandura, 1997), and school norms (Bianchini & Cavaros, 2007;
Crawford, 2007; Seiler, 2001).
It has been suggested that reflection on practice may mediate change in beliefs
and practice (Yerrick & Hoving, 2003). Capps et al. (2012) advocate that
professional development programs should provide opportunities for teachers to
examine their beliefs and reflect upon their teaching in meaningful contexts in order
to support inquiry-based instruction. Luft (1999) found reflection was necessary for
implicit beliefs to become explicit. Rushton et al. (2011) further found professional
development that provided opportunities for teachers to both individually and
collectively reflect on inquiry-based practices resulted in a conceptual change in the
participating teachers.

Interconnected Model of Professional Growth

In this study, the Interconnected Model of Professional Growth (Clarke &

Hollingsworth, 2002) was used to examine the complex relationship between beliefs

123
698 K. Lebak

External Domain

External Sources
of Information or
Stimulus

Personal Domain Domain of Practice

Knowledge,
Beliefs, and Professional
Attitude Experimentation

Salient
Outcomes
Domain of
Consequence
Enactment
Reflection

Fig. 1 Interconnected model of professional growth (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002, p. 951)

and inquiry-based science practices along with identifying the processes that
mediated teacher change during participation in a professional development
process. The Interconnected Model of Professional Growth suggests that teacher
change occurs through the mediating processes of ‘reflection’ and ‘enaction’ in four
distinct domains (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002). The model allows for the
identification of growth pathways between the four domains: the personal domain
where teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes are found, the domain of practice
where experimenting of instructional practices can occur, the domain of
consequence which includes all salient outcomes, and the external domain which
is distinguished from the other domains by its location outside the teacher’s personal
world. Change in one domain is translated into change in another domain through
the mediating processes of reflection (dotted arrows) and enactment (solid arrow) as
shown in Fig. 1.

Methodology

This qualitative study uses case study methodology to afford me the opportunity
to explore deeply the relationship between beliefs, practices, and change of one
science teacher, Jerry (Creswell, 2007). Specifically, this study aimed to answer the
following questions:

123
Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs… 699

1. What is the relationship between beliefs and practices related to inquiry-based

instruction of one science teacher teaching in a high-poverty urban school?
2. What factors mediate change in beliefs and practices related to inquiry-based
instruction of one science teacher teaching in a high-poverty urban school?

At the time of this study, Jerry had been teaching for 5 years, all at the high-
poverty urban school in which the data for this study were collected. Jerry was
chosen for this case study for two reasons. First, the context of Jerry’s teaching
assignment allowed for in-depth study of a teacher in a high-needs school. The city
in which the school is located is ranked as one of the top ten most dangerous cities
in the nation, and 93.5 % of the students in the school are classified as economically
disadvantaged. The school, educating students from grades kindergarten to eighth, is
identified as an academic school in need, which are determined by school
achievement scores that are consistently in the lowest 10 % of all schools in the
state. The second reason Jerry was chosen was the information-rich nature of the
data collected through Jerry’s writings and collaborative dialogue sessions that
allowed for in-depth analysis and deeper understanding of the relationship between
beliefs and practice.
Jerry held multiple certifications including elementary education, middle school
science, and special education. His teaching responsibilities included teaching
science and providing special education support to 24 fifth-grade students. At the
time of the study, Jerry was in the process of completing a graduate-level degree
focused on improving his practice related to his teaching assignment. As part of the
graduate-level program, Jerry had taken a semester-long course focused upon
inquiry-based instruction the year before participating in this study. However, he
had not had experience implementing inquiry in his own science classroom.

Video-Supported Reflection Model

In this study, practicing elementary and middle school science teachers were
initially introduced to the pedagogy of inquiry-based teaching through a graduate-
level science course that was part of a program of study for practicing teachers at a
mid-size university. In order to connect concepts learned in the science course with
classroom practice, the teachers participated in a yearlong video-supported
reflection process designed to enhance teachers’ use of inquiry-based science in
their classrooms during their final year of graduate study. Through the process,
teachers videotaped their lessons and reflected individually on the lesson. Next, the
teachers collaboratively viewed and reflected upon the videotaped lesson with a peer
group. The peer groups were comprised of 4–6 other teachers that worked together
for a full academic year. The peer group provided insights and support related to
implementing inquiry-based instruction in the classroom. Jerry’s peer group was
comprised of three other upper elementary school teachers who were responsible for
teaching all subjects, including science. Teachers participated in six cycles of the
video-supported collaborative reflection cycle between September 2012 and May
2013. Figure 2 illustrates the model.

123
700 K. Lebak

Video teaching of
lesson

Adapt instruction
Self-reflection on
based upon
teaching video
reflections

Engage in discourse
View teaching video
with peer group on
with peer group
teaching video

Fig. 2 Video-supported reflection cycle

Multiple data sources including transcribed collaborative dialogue sessions,

written self-reflections, and videotapes of lessons were collected over a year to
develop the case study. In all, six videotaped lessons were collected. The
corresponding six collaborative dialogue sessions between peers were videotaped
and transcribed in their entirety. Reflective logs captured self-reflections that
chronicled Jerry’s reactions before and after the viewing of the videotape with his
peers along with his thoughts as he worked to implement change in his science
classroom.

Data Analysis

Data analysis took place in a number of phases. First, all written reflections
including reflections written before the viewing a videoed lesson and reflections
written after the viewing of a videotaped lesson and transcribed peer dialogue
sessions were coded for statements indicating beliefs about science teaching and
learning which defined practice. Bryan’s (2003) characterization of beliefs for
science teaching and learning was used as a foundation for the initial coding. After
the initial coding, the codes were reexamined and redefined as needed to account for
all data related to beliefs about science teaching and learning as presented in Table 1.
Beliefs on student capabilities emerged as a particularly salient category during the
initial coding process and were added. Two belief categories, the nature of science
and goals of science instruction and control in the science classroom did not emerge
as a separate belief categories from the data and therefore were not included.
Next, in order to examine the relationship between practice and beliefs, in-depth
descriptions of each of the six videotaped science lessons were developed.
Individual lesson descriptions were developed for each of the following areas: the
value of science instruction conveyed through the lesson, the goal of the science
instruction in the lesson, the students’ role during the instruction, the teachers’ role

123
Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs… 701

Table 1 Characterization of beliefs

Belief category Description Example from collaborative
dialogue sessions or reflective log

Beliefs about the value Statements regarding the value and Science should be relevant to the
of teaching science purpose of teaching science lives of the students
Beliefs about how Statements of how students learn science Students need to engage in
children best learn inquiry-based learning
science
Beliefs about the Statements related to the students’ Students should engage in science
students role in the responsibility for science learning in the exploration as if they were
science classroom classroom setting scientists
Beliefs about the Statements related to the teachers’ A teacher should be a ‘‘‘guide on
teachers role in the responsibility in the science classroom the side’’ as opposed to a ‘‘sage
science classroom on the stage’’’
Beliefs about student Statements related to students’ abilities to Students don’t have the
capabilities engage in scientific inquiry. Specifically, background knowledge
these were statements related to necessary to conduct inquiry
academic and behavioral readiness lessons

in the instruction, and the instructional approach used to teach the lesson. Written
profiles were created which included teacher quotes and actions for each of the
belief systems related to science instruction in Jerry’s fifth-grade classroom.
The coded data for each belief system were then connected with one of the four
domains of the Interconnected Model of Professional Growth. In this study, the four
domains were defined as follows: the external domain referred to professional
development through video-supported collaborative reflection groups that served as
a space in which teachers analyze and make recommendations for the enactment of
inquiry-based practices based upon their own videos. The domain of practice was
the science lessons taught in the classroom and captured on video. The domain of
consequence was defined as indicators of teacher change designated by new
conclusions. For the purposes of this research, the personal domain was defined by
the teacher’s beliefs related to teaching inquiry-based science in his urban
classroom. Specifically, Bryan’s (2003) characterization of beliefs of science
teaching and learning was used as a foundation for identifying the teacher’s
individual beliefs in the personal domain.
Finally, pictorial representations (pictogram) for each belief system were created.
The visual representation allowed me to trace pathways of change within the belief
systems along with the mediating processes of reflection (dotted arrows) and
enactment (solid arrow).

Findings

In this section, I report on the individual belief systems that emerged from the
data that influenced Jerry’s instructional decisions in his science classroom. The
Interconnected Model of Professional Growth was then used to trace the change

123
702 K. Lebak

process of Jerry’s beliefs and practices regarding the implementation of inquiry-

based instruction in his science classroom.

Beliefs About the Value of Teaching Science

Jerry’s belief system about the value of teaching science emerged as a consistent
belief system during participation in the project. In Jerry’s initial reflection, he
explicitly articulated the value he placed on teaching science in the urban context.
Science should be relevant to the lives of the students. We live in a city which
is named the sixth hardest city in the country to get a job. The kids need to
know science can be an option but it should also have meaning to them (Self-
Reflection, September 16, 2012).
His videotaped lessons supported his beliefs that teaching science in his urban
context was a priority. Due to the lack of available science resources in the school,
Jerry had purchased his own supplies for the purposes of demonstrating scientific
concepts. He was committed to teaching science on a daily basis. It is important to
note, the value he placed on science instruction was in contrast to the established
norms in his school.
These kids haven’t had opportunities to learn science at all. We don’t have
science books or supplies. Science isn’t even taught in grades K-4 since
reading and math are the dominant subjects. The fact that the students don’t
pass the state science test is not of concern when they don’t pass the math and
English Language Arts tests. As a result, science is a forgotten subject. This is
the first time in their lives that the students have had science instruction on a
regular basis (Self-Reflection, September 18, 2012).
Jerry’s willingness to prioritize science instruction despite the lack of resources
and limited school wide support remained consistent for the duration of this process.

Changes in Beliefs Regarding Student Capabilities

Analysis of the data coded as changes in beliefs regarding student capabilities

revealed that Jerry’s initial beliefs in this area served as the foundation for Jerry’s
pedagogical choices in his teaching of science. Jerry initially held deficit beliefs
regarding his students’ academic capabilities and motivation to learn science.
Jerry’s initial dialogue session with his peers provided a lens for understanding his
beliefs of his students’ academic readiness to learn science.
The students are not tested in the 5th grade, however, they are tested in the 4th
grade. The kids always fail the state test. They don’t have the background in
science that they need to be successful. The average reading level in my class
is grade 3.8 (Collaborative Dialogue Session, September, 24, 2012).
In addition, Jerry perceived his students were not motivated to learn science,

123
Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs… 703

These students are not interested in learning science. As you will see in the
videotaped lesson, they don’t pay attention to me at all. Instead they just talk
through me because they don’t respect science. It makes it very hard to teach a
science lesson (Collaborative Dialogue Session, September, 24, 2012).
The relationship between Jerry’s beliefs of his student’s capabilities as related to
learning science and practice was reflected in the instruction in his classroom. The
first video that Jerry showed his peer group demonstrated how Jerry strictly
controlled each aspect of the lesson. He stood in the front of the classroom and
lectured to the students about the different types of rocks found on Earth. He utilized
examples of rocks as visuals, but students were not given the opportunity to interact
with the scientific materials.
As the lesson progressed, students became increasingly restless. Although Jerry’s
peers praised his content knowledge on rocks and minerals, they challenged how
Jerry’s didactic approach was limiting his students’ opportunities to learn science.
Tasha: It is very loud. Is there a group of students having recess outside your
window?
Jerry: No, it is just the groups in the back of the classroom making that noise.
Kelly: Is it always that loud during your science class?
Jerry: Yes, the students aren’t always interested in what I am teaching so they
tend to talk through my lessons.
Kelly: How will the students have the opportunities to learn science if they
aren’t engaged in any science?
Cara: Kids need to be engaged for learning to take place (Collaborative
Dialogue Session, September, 24, 2012).
After the initial peer dialogue session, Jerry wrote,
My peers provided suggestions for increasing the engagement of the students
so they might successfully learn scientific concepts in a meaningful manner. I
am going to attempt hands-on activities to see if it will help the students’
behaviors (Self-Reflection, September, 26, 2012).
However, when Jerry attempted a more student-centered approach to instruction, the
classroom became chaotic serving to reinforce Jerry’s deficit perspective regarding
his students’ capabilities to learn science.
I am wondering if the make-up of these kids makes doing this type of science
impossible. There are no kids in my classroom that are on grade level. The
students in the classroom do not value education (October 29, 2012).
Although Jerry may have resigned himself that his students were not capable of
learning science through a reformed-based approach, his peer group challenged
Jerry’s assumptions why the lesson failed.
Kelly: Do you think the kids understood what they were to do?
Jerry: They were to make the imprint.

123
704 K. Lebak

Kelly: I know from watching it that it took a long time to figure out what they
were supposed to do. I am not sure any students in any class would have
successfully learned science during that lesson.
Cara: All kids really need a clear purpose and directions. I don’t think they
knew what they were to do and so with water, glue, and clay in their hands it
became time to goof off (Collaborative Dialogue Session, November 26,
2012).
This dialogue session proved to be the catalyst for Jerry to confront his own actions
in the classroom as opposed to accepting the deficit perspective that he had
articulated. He writes,
I remember being so angry during the lesson but now, after watching the video
with my group I realize I am the teacher I hate. I get so frustrated and angry
when it isn’t working. They deserve more than I am giving them (November
28, 2012).
At the end of the academic year, Jerry’s belief of the capabilities of the students has
profoundly changed. He writes,
The most important lesson I have recently learned is that these kids can handle
it. By that I mean I have had low expectations of these kids and have taught
with that in mind. I have not ‘‘raised the bar’’ for them and asked them to reach
it. They have surprised me that when given the chance they really want to be
challenged. I have not given them that opportunity (May 20, 2013).

Changes in Beliefs Regarding the Role of the Teacher

When enacting inquiry-based instruction, a teacher’s role needs to shift to one of

a facilitator which requires letting go of authority (Crawford, 2000). During his
initial reflective conversations, Jerry espoused personal beliefs that a teacher should
be a ‘‘‘guide on the side’’ as opposed to a ‘‘sage on the stage’’’ (September 18,
2012). However, contradictory beliefs emerged in Jerry’s enacted practice. During
instruction, Jerry stood in the front of the classroom providing information on rocks
as students faced forward in desks organized in traditional rows. Jerry’s teaching
strategy allowed him to maintain strict control on all aspects of the lesson. His peer
group challenged the teacher-directed nature of the classroom and provided clear
feedback on changes he needed to make in his practices in order change his role as a
teacher. However, as Jerry attempted to relinquish control from the teacher-directed
approach he initially met with chaos in his classroom.
His written reflection following a lesson on making fossils provided evidence that
changing his role from teacher centered to student centered was a challenge.
What a mess today. The activity involved discovering fossils. After a brief
explanation of fossils and imprints I tried to have the students make an
imprint. Water, glue, and clay everywhere—in hair, on the desks, seats. I am
starting to resolve that direct instruction gives them more knowledge and
keeps them under control (Self-Reflection, January 12, 2013).

123
Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs… 705

Analysis of the dialogue sessions following the sharing the video of the lesson on
fossils revealed how the peer group challenged his organizational role as teacher in
the classroom, specifically drawing attention to his planning of the science lessons
and his management of the lesson.
Tasha: Have you tried to design your lessons with the 5 E’s? That might help
you have a structure and then you really need to organize the exploration part
of the lesson. Yelling at the kids when they have no idea what they are to do
won’t help.
Cara: Besides a clear purpose for the lesson you also need to provide explicit
instructions for each step (Collaborative Dialogue, January 14, 2013).
He writes in his reflection journal,
I got pretty beat up by my group this week. They said I need to organize the
materials for the activity portion of the lesson, define the objectives of the
lesson, and actively monitor student learning. They suggested I use the five
E’s cycle for planning and delivering my lessons (Self-Reflection, January 16,
2013).
Through the work with his peer group, Jerry began to develop a set of skills as a
teacher necessary for managing an inquiry-based classroom.
He writes,
I have to explain–demonstrate–explain the procedure BEFORE they get the
materials. I understand that the students need very explicit instructions to
perform a task. Yesterday’s lesson was the most organized of all my lessons
(Self-Reflection February 11, 2013).
At the end of the year, his reflections reveal a fundamental change in his role as a
teacher.
Looking back at my first attempts at teaching inquiry I was having students
engage in activity for the sake of activity without any structure. I stepped back
and thought they would just be able to do it and it was chaos. I still need to
work on how to manage the classroom where I am not controlling the lesson
but I have made steps (Self-Reflection, June, 10, 2013).

Change in Beliefs Regarding the Role of the Students

The implementation of a scientific inquiry model of instruction required a shift in

the students’ role in addition to the shift in the teachers’ role. During the first
videotaped lesson, the format of the lesson required the students to sit quietly and
watch Jerry hold up different types of rocks. During the lesson the students were
treated as passive recipients of knowledge. However, the videotaped lesson revealed
that few students were listening intently to Jerry.
Jerry: The kids are very active during the lesson. Science is the last period of
the day and the kids just want to go home.

123
706 K. Lebak

Cara: As a science teacher I think students need to more involvement in their

learning. Why don’t you try to integrate more hands-on learning with less
teacher talk?
Tasha: That might help more students be involved in the lesson (Collaborative
Dialogue Session, September, 24, 2012).
As Jerry worked to shift his role, he also worked to develop student ownership in
the learning process through a more student-centered approach to instruction. The
last video shows Jerry teaching inquiry processing skills to his students through
having them carry out a scientific investigations. He introduces the process of
observation in the inquiry process to his students using a video. Students
brainstormed in pairs how they could use their five senses for the purpose of
observation. In small groups, the students created a balloon rocket and then recorded
their observations of the investigation.

Change in Beliefs Regarding How Students’ Best Learn Science

The final changes that emerged focused on Jerry’s beliefs regarding how his
students best learn science. Like Jerry’s beliefs of the role of the teacher and the role
of students, contradictions emerged between Jerry’s espoused beliefs in how
students best learn science and his enacted practice. In his self-reflection, he
articulated congruence with reform-based approaches that provide opportunities for
students to explore scientific content deeply as opposed to surface-level memo-
rization of scientific facts.
I really like the idea of making science fun and meaningful. Students should
be exposed to the big picture and not so much the minutia. They should have
opportunities to engage in science exploration as if they were scientists.
Science at the grade school level has often been taught as a ‘mile long and a
foot deep’. The theory of teaching has changed in that the depth of the subject
matter should be more thoroughly investigated even at the expense of the
variety and amount of different topics (Self-Reflection, September 18, 2012).
However, his teaching was in sharp contrast to his espoused beliefs on how
students’ best learn science. His lesson revealed his scientific knowledge from a
didactic transmission model in which students were passive recipients of
knowledge. In his first videotaped lesson, Jerry asked a series of rapid-fire low-
level teacher-directed questions focused upon learning discrete facts.
Teacher: Which type of rock is formed from cooled melted rock?
Student: Igneous
Teacher: Which type of rock is formed from little bits of rock that have been
cemented together?
Student: Sedimentary
Teacher: What is an example of a sedimentary rock?
Student: Sandstone
After watching the first video, Jerry writes,

123
Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs… 707

When I first viewed the video by myself I saw a very teacher directed class. I
know that I would like to do more labs and explorations that stimulate interests
and overall concept of the idea rather than the learning of vocabulary they will
forget as soon as they walk out the door. I believe kids learn science better that
way (October 1, 2013).
Once Jerry recognized the inconsistencies, he worked to develop lessons that
reflected his espoused beliefs on how students best learn science. However, the
initial attempts of hands-on learning resulted in more chaos and less engagement on
the parts of the students. After showing his peer group a second failed lesson, Jerry
states,
I am starting to resolve that direct instruction gives them more knowledge and
keeps them under control. I don’t know that a ‘‘hands-on’’ approach is the
most efficient and viable way of learning for kids without any scientific
background. This is not to say there is NO room in the class for active
participation but teacher direction works best for these kids (Collaborative
Dialogue, January 14, 2013).
At this point, Jerry’s peer group challenged his beliefs, explicitly questioning his
organization of the planning and implementation of the lesson.
Cara: I don’t think it is the method of the instruction but rather how you are
setting up the lessons.
Kelly: You really need to clear about your directions. The kids are clearly
confused on what they are supposed to do (Collaborative Dialogue, January
14, 2013).
Jerry reflected upon his peer’s feedback regarding his approach to organizing the
lesson and reconsidered the reasons why inquiry-based approaches were not
working in his classroom. He became more prepared with his lessons and more
explicit with his expectations. At the end of the academic year, he writes,
As for the presentation of my material I can sum it up quickly in saying, ‘tell
less and ask more.’ The art of inquiry pulls the teacher from the center of
learning and allows for the students to take a much more active role. I knew
what this meant for teaching inquiry based classrooms, just not my own until
now (May 20, 2013).

Relationship Between Change in Beliefs and Practices

Pictorial representations for each of the belief systems were developed to trace
pathways of change and to identify how the mediating factors influenced change in
the different domains. Development of the individual pictorial representations
revealed that the changes in each of the belief systems followed the same complex
pathway leading to change in the individual belief systems and practices as
illustrated in Fig. 3.

123
708 K. Lebak

External Domain

Video
supported
collaborative
reflection
3, 5 2, 6
Personal
Domain Domain of Practice
1 Science
Individual
Beliefs classroom

8 7
New
conclusions

Reflection Domain of
Consequence
Enactment

Fig. 3 Pathway of change

Arrow 1 represents how Jerry’s original beliefs regarding his students’ academic
background and motivation impacted the enaction of science lessons in his
classroom, resulting in a transmission-oriented approach to teaching science. As his
peer group challenged his beliefs through the video-supported collaborative groups
(External Domain), Jerry both enacted a different instructional strategy (arrow 2)
and began to reflect upon his own individual beliefs including how students learn,
his role as a science teacher, his students’ role as learners, and his own students’
capabilities (arrow 3). However, challenges implementing inquiry instruction
caused Jerry to reflect in ways that served to reinforce his initial beliefs (arrow 4).
Video-supported collaboration provided the support necessary to once again reflect
upon (arrow 5) and experiment with inquiry-based instruction (arrow 6). Jerry’s
enactment of a more student-centered approach to science instruction based upon
his reflections ultimately led to new conclusions (arrow 7) changing each of the
individual belief systems (arrow 8).
As the pictorial representation illustrates, the process of change in each of the
individual belief systems was a complex process where change occurred in multiple
domains and was mediated by reflection and enactment. The video-supported
reflection (External Domain) served as the catalyst for both Jerry’s individual
reflections and enactment of a more student-centered inquiry-based approach of
science instruction (Domain of Practice). As this representation illustrates, the
mediating factor of reflection (noted by the dotted lines) dominated the change
process leading Jerry to draw new conclusions about inquiry-based instruction for
his students ultimately shifting his beliefs systems.

123
Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs… 709

Discussion

This case study allowed me to examine the complexity of the relationship

between the belief systems and practice of one science teacher. Past research has
found that assessing teacher beliefs is challenging and furthermore the relationship
between change in teacher’s beliefs and teacher’s practice is not clear (Capps et al.,
2012). Profiling Jerry’s individual belief systems afforded me the opportunity to
isolate the belief systems that were critical to Jerry’s decision making as a teacher of
science and to examine the relationship between the individual beliefs and practice.
Furthermore, the use of the Interconnected Model of Professional Growth model
allowed me to trace the trajectories of change of the belief systems, identifying the
salient mediating factors necessary for change to occur.
The first research question sought to examine the relationship between beliefs
and practices related to inquiry-based instruction of one science teacher teaching in
a high-poverty urban school. This study found that the relationship between beliefs
and practices was a complex relationship in which initially espoused beliefs were
often inconsistent with enacted practice. As Bryan (2003) previously reported, this
study found some individual beliefs were more central than other beliefs in
influencing enacted practice contributing to the inconsistencies.
Jerry espoused a commitment to an inquiry-based approach to teaching science in
which he articulated beliefs regarding the role of the teacher and the role of the
student that were consistent with an inquiry-based approach to instruction. He stated
the teacher’s role should be a ‘‘‘guide on the side’’ as opposed to a ‘‘sage on the
stage’’’ and students ‘should have opportunities to engage in science exploration as
if they were scientists’; however, his enacted practice reflected a teacher-centered
approach to instruction in which passive acquisition of facts was the norm.
Statements related to his beliefs of student capabilities including ‘[t]he kids always
fail the state test. They don’t have the background in science that they need to be
successful’ revealed that Jerry unconsciously had adopted a deficit perspective of
his urban students that influenced the enacted practice in the classroom despite an
articulated belief in an inquiry-based approach to science instruction. Prior research
has found teacher beliefs regarding student capabilities can be constraints for
implementing inquiry-based instruction (Lotter et al., 2007; Wallace & Kang, 2004)
and specifically research of science teachers in urban areas finds reform-based
approaches to teaching science often conflict with a commonly held deficit view of
urban students (Thadani, Cook, Griffis, Wise, & Blakey, 2010). In this case study,
Jerry’s beliefs regarding his students’ capabilities trumped other beliefs that were
consistent with an inquiry-based approach to the instruction. This research confirms
how an individual belief can influence other beliefs and become the foundation for
enacted practice.
Past research has found a direct influence of beliefs on instructional practices
(Ernest, 1989; Wilkins, 2008); however, the interaction between the two is less clear
(Capps et al., 2012). This study found that beliefs and practices interacted in
complex ways in which beliefs influenced practice but practice also served to
reinforce and influence beliefs. Initially, Jerry’s beliefs strongly influenced his

123
710 K. Lebak

practice in the science classroom. As he worked to enact a more inquiry-based

approach to his science instruction, initial experiments with inquiry instruction
served to strengthen his beliefs regarding his students’ capabilities. However, as
Jerry met with greater success in his implementation of an inquiry-based approach
to science teaching, his belief systems changed. In this regard, it was the change in
instructional practice that directly influenced change in belief systems.
The second research question sought to study the factors that mediated change in
Jerry’s beliefs and practices as related to inquiry-based instruction. In this study, the
relationship between beliefs and practice, in which each initially served to reinforce
a teacher dominated approach to instruction, had to be disrupted for change in both
beliefs and practices to occur. Video-supported collaborative reflection with peers
served as the catalyst for change by creating uneasiness for Jerry as he confronted
his beliefs regarding his students’ capacity. Initially, Jerry viewed his videotapes of
his lessons through the lens of his established belief system. However, the
collaborative peer group dialogue offered a different perspective. Thompson and
Zeuli (1999) maintain that professional development must create ‘cognitive
dissonance’ in teachers in order to confront existing beliefs and practices. This
research supports this assertion concluding that cognitive dissonance as a result of
the collaborative dialogue was a necessary ingredient for change in beliefs regarding
inquiry-based instruction.
However, this research found that the trajectories of change occurred through the
relationship of collaborative reflections in the group and Jerry’s own self-reflections
that were based upon tensions that emerged through individual belief systems.
While the collaborative dialogue sessions created cognitive dissonance necessary to
begin the process of individual reflective thought, this research suggests the way in
which Jerry reconciled inconsistencies in his own belief systems mediated change in
his core belief systems and practice. The value that Jerry placed upon science
instruction coupled with his own knowledge of best scientific practice provided a
foundation for Jerry to consider and build upon his peers’ reflections. His need to
reconcile the inconsistencies within his belief systems, once consciously recognized
through the collaborative reflection process, ultimately led Jerry to change his
practice.
In the analysis of the data illustrated in the pictorial representation of the belief
systems, reflection was the dominant factor for mediating change in each of the
individual belief systems. In Clarke and Hollingsworth’s (2002) model, change in
beliefs occurs only through the processes of reflection. Furthermore, changes in the
domain of consequence (new conclusions) occur only through the processes of
reflection. This research affirms that the change in teacher beliefs and the drawing of
new conclusions of teaching only occurred through the complex process of reflection.
This finding highlights how shifting belief systems and practices can be a slow
and rather fragile process. Jerry’s development was not linear; instead, it was
marked by a series of progressions and regressions as he attempted to enact inquiry
instruction but initially failed. The honest feedback by his peer group was pivotal
for Jerry to persevere for change to occur. However, in other instances the initial
failure of the inquiry-based approach might have reinforced existing beliefs
solidifying Jerry’s approach to teaching science.

123
Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs… 711

Conclusion and Implications

Despite calls for the implementation of inquiry-based instruction in science

classrooms, teachers’ use of inquiry-based instruction remains the exception rather
than the norm in most classrooms, a challenge that is even more apparent in urban
schools serving economically disadvantaged and racially and ethnically diverse
students (Capps & Crawford, 2013; Smith & Southerland, 2007). Research finds
teacher beliefs can play a role in how teachers enact science instruction in their
classrooms; however, the nature of the interaction between beliefs and practices and
the factors that mediate change have been the subject of debate (Bryan, 2003; Lee
et al., 2004). Some research studies have found inconsistencies between espoused
beliefs and practices of science teachers with teachers articulating a commitment to
reform-based science instruction but enacting a more traditional approach (Hancock
& Gallard, 2004; King et al., 2001; Savasci & Berlin, 2012). In this study, the initial
inconsistencies between Jerry’s espoused beliefs and enacted practice in regard to
inquiry-based instruction were raised to the conscious level through participation in
the video-supported reflection process with his peers. Through the process, both
beliefs and practices shifted through the mediating process of reflection leading to
the enactment of inquiry-based instruction in Jerry’s classroom.
Results from this study highlight the need for sustained collaborative professional
development which provide opportunities for teachers to reflect upon enacted
practice in the science classroom. In this study, the use of video-supported reflection
with peers provided the space necessary for Jerry to consciously confront beliefs
and how those beliefs translated to enacted practices. The video of actual practice
provided a concrete example of science practices providing greater opportunities for
deep reflection that led to shift in both beliefs and enacted practice. Furthermore, the
yearlong nature of the professional development process allowed opportunities for
Jerry to develop his practice over time ultimately changing his belief systems based
upon the evidence of a successful outcome.
It is important to note that this study was limited to one case study. Jerry had a
number of personal characteristics that contributed to his shift in belief systems
including a strong commitment to science education, willingness to try new
instructional strategies, and high level of reflection skills. Further research will be
necessary to study the complex relationship of teacher change specific to inquiry
instruction and the role professional development can play in providing opportu-
nities to examine beliefs and enacted practice.

References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
Bianchini, J. A., & Cavaros, L. M. (2007). Learning from students, inquiry into practice, and participating
in professional communities: Beginning teachers’ uneven progress toward equitable science
teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 586–612.
Bryan, L. A. (2003). Nestedness of beliefs: Examining a prospective elementary teacher’s belief system
about science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 835–868.

123
712 K. Lebak

Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013). Inquiry-based instruction and teaching about nature of science:
Are they happening? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 497–526.
Capps, D. K., Crawford, B. A., & Constas, M. A. (2012). A review of the empirical literature on inquiry
professional development: Alignment with best practices and a critique of the findings. Journal of
Science Teacher Education, 23, 291–318.
Clarke, D. J., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 18, 947–967.
Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 37, 916–937.
Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 613–642.
Crawford, B. A. (2012). Moving the essence of science into the classroom: Engaging teachers and
students in authentic science. In K. C. D. Tan & M. Kim (Eds.), Issues and challenges in science
education: Moving forward (pp. 25–42). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cronin-Jones, L. L. (1991). Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curriculum implementation:
Two case studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 235–250.
Edelson, D. (1998). Realizing authentic science learning through the adaptation of science practice. In B.
J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 317–331).
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Ernest, P. (1989). The knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: A model. Journal of
Education for Teaching, 15, 13–33.
Fives, H., & Buehl, M. (2014). Exploring differences in practicing teachers’ valuing of pedagogical
knowledge based on teaching ability beliefs. Journal of Teacher Education, 65, 435–448. doi:10.
1177/0022487114541813
Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher,
15(5), 5–12.
Hancock, E. S., & Gallard, A. J. (2004). Preservice science teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning:
The influence of K-12 field experiences. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15, 281–291.
Haney, J. J., & McArthur, J. (2002). Four case studies of prospective science teachers’ beliefs concerning
constructivist teaching practices. Science Education, 86, 783–802.
King, K., Shumow, L., & Lietz, S. (2001). Science education in an urban elementary school: Case studies
of teacher beliefs and classroom practices. Science Education, 85, 89–110.
Lee, O., Hart, J., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2004). Professional development in inquiry-based science for
elementary teachers of diverse students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1021–1043.
Lotter, C., Harwood, W. S., & Bonner, J. J. (2007). The influence of core teaching conceptions on
teachers’ use of inquiry teaching practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44,
1318–1347.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional
development for teachers of science and mathematics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Luft, J. A. (1999). Teachers’ salient beliefs about a problem solving demonstration classroom inservice
program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 36, 141–158.
Mangiante, E. (2013). Planning science instruction for critical thinking: Two urban elementary teachers’
responses to a state science assessment. Education Sciences, 3, 222–258.
Mansour, N. (2009). Science teachers’ beliefs and practices: Issues, implications and research agenda.
International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(1), 25–48.
Meyer, X., & Crawford, B. A. (2011). Teaching science as a cultural way of knowing: Merging authentic
inquiry, nature of science, and multicultural strategies. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 6,
525–547. doi:10.1007/s11422-011-9318-6
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington,
DC: National Academies Press.
Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19,
317–328.

123
Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Beliefs… 713

Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery, &
E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 102–119). New York, NY:
Macmillan.
Roehrig, G. H., & Luft, J. A. (2004). Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in
implementing scientific inquiry lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 3–24.
Rushton, G. T., Lotter, C., & Singer, J. (2011). Chemistry teachers’ emerging expertise in inquiry
teaching: The effect of a professional development model on beliefs and practice. Journal of Science
Teacher Education, 22, 23–52. doi:10.1007/s10972-010-9224-x
Savasci, F., & Berlin, D. F. (2012). Science teacher beliefs and classroom practice related to
constructivism in different school settings. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23, 65–86.
doi:10.1007/s10972-011-9262-z
Seiler, G. (2001). Reversing the ‘‘standard’’ direction: Science emerging from the lives of African-
American students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 1000–1014.
Smith, L., & Southerland, S. (2007). Reforming practice or modifying reform? Elementary teachers’
response to the tools of reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 396–423.
Thadani, V., Cook, M. S., Griffis, K., Wise, J. A., & Blakey, A. (2010). The possibilities and limitations
of curriculum-based science inquiry interventions for challenging the ‘‘pedagogy of poverty’’.
Equity and Excellence in Education, 43, 21–37.
Thompson, C. L., & Zeuli, J. S. (1999). The frame and the tapestry: Standards-based reform and
professional development. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning
profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 341–375). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wallace, C. S., & Kang, M. H. (2004). An investigation of experienced secondary science teachers’
beliefs about inquiry: An examination of competing belief sets. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 41, 936–960.
Wilkins, J. L. M. (2008). The relationship among elementary teachers’ content knowledge, attitudes,
beliefs, and practices. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 139–164.
Yerrick, R. K., & Hoving, T. J. (2003). One foot on the dock and one foot on the boat: Differences among
preservice science teachers’ interpretations of field-based science methods in culturally diverse
contexts. Science Education, 87, 390–418.
Yilmaz-Tuzun, O. (2008). Preservice teachers’ beliefs about science teaching. Journal of Science Teacher
Education, 19, 183–204.

123