Identifying Teachers' Beliefs about Teaching Cancer ...

Identifying Complexity in Biology Teachers‘ Beliefs about Teaching Cancer Education An Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour Expectancy-Value Framework

by Benedikt Heuckmann, Marcus Hammann & Roman Asshoff Centre for Biology Education University of Münster, Germany

Benedikt Heuckmann, Marcus Hammann & Roman Asshoff ESERA Conference – Dublin, 2017 | SIG#4 Symposium: Health and Medicine in Science Education

> The focus of this talk

recognising the exemplary value of teaching cancer education

unlocking the potential of teachers’ beliefs with the theory of planned behaviour

spotlight on salient beliefs by applying the expectancy-value framework

2


Professional Development & Teachers‘ Beliefs

   

Professional Knowledge Professional Beliefs Self-Regulation Skills Motivational Orientations

> Beliefs may determine teachers‘ classroom behaviour

> Knowledge about beliefs help to identify professional development needs

Generic Structural Model of Teachers‘ Professional Competence (Baumert & Kunter, 2006)

Baumert & Kunter, 2006; Kunter et al., 2013; Jones & Leagon, 2014

3


Teachers‘ beliefs about teaching socioscientific issues > cancer, a complex health-realted issue Challenge #1

complex scientific knowledge

Challenge #2

controversies

Challenge #3

multi-faceted character

Challenge #4

challenges on system level

cancer education Tidemand & Nielsen, 2017; Zeyer, Keselman, & Levin, 2015; Ekborg et al., 2013; Fensham, 2012; Ratcliffe & Grace, 2003

4


Previous studies on teaching cancer education – prevailing focus on difficulties and barriers > reflect the emotional implications and social relevance of cancer

> teachers are aware of the preventative value of cancer education - Beliefs about negative emotional consequences - Beliefs that indicate teachers‘ low self-efficacy - Beliefs that reveal teachers have to deal with their own emotions and fears - Beliefs about a lack of appropriate teaching methodologies & teaching resources

Barros et al. 2014; Peraksilis & Quintana, 2012; Carey et al. 1995a, 1995b; Carey, 1992 Cribb, 1990

5


Research Questions > What beliefs do teachers hold about teaching cancer education in biology classes at secondary school? > To what extent can the theory of planned behaviour be used as a theoretical model to develop a questionnaire on teachers beliefs?

6


The Theory of Planned Behaviour Attitudes towards the Behaviour

Normative Beliefs

Control Beliefs

Salient Beliefs*

Behavioural Beliefs

Subjective Norm

Behavioural Intentions

Behaviour

Perceived Behavioural Control

* beliefs readily accessible in mind Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010

7


The Theory of Planned Behaviour Behavioural Beliefs

Normative Beliefs

Control Beliefs

DEFINITION Beliefs about outcomes or consequences of teaching cancer education DEFINITION beliefs about expectations by normative referents to teach cancer education DEFINITION beliefs about the presence of internal and external control factors

De Leeuw et al., 2015; Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010

“ “ “

Most of my students will be aware of carcinogenic risk factors.

People who have cancer expect me to teach about cancer. Appropriate teaching material education will be available.

I can answer students medical questions about cancer. 8


Study design Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Phase 4

Belief elicitation with open-ended questionnaire

Belief elicitation with interviews

Development and testing of closed items

Identification of salient beliefs

n=168 n=168

n=11

> >

>

n=58

>

n=30

>

Phase 5 Application of the expectancyvalue framework n=23

-> this study is the foundation of the main study (currently: data collection) 9


Methods - The Expectancy Value Framework 𝑳𝑰𝑲𝑬𝑳𝑰𝑯𝑶𝑶𝑫 𝑱𝑼𝑫𝑮𝑬𝑴𝑬𝑵𝑻𝑺 𝐻𝑜𝑤 𝑙𝑖𝑘𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑑𝑜𝑒𝑠 𝑚𝑦 𝑡𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑟 𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 ℎ𝑎𝑠 𝑎 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑒?

𝑬𝑽𝑨𝑳𝑼𝑨𝑻𝑰𝑶𝑵 𝑱𝑼𝑫𝑮𝑬𝑴𝑬𝑵𝑻𝑺 𝐷𝑜 𝐼 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑜𝑟 𝑛𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑒?

𝐻𝑜𝑤 𝑙𝑖𝑘𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑑𝑜𝑒𝑠 𝑎 𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑚𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑡𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑟 𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛?

𝐷𝑜 𝐼 𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑦 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 ′ 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛?

𝐻𝑜𝑤 𝑙𝑖𝑘𝑒𝑙𝑦 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑎𝑛 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑜𝑟 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑏𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡?

𝐷𝑜 𝐼 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑠 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑟 𝑖𝑛ℎ𝑖𝑏𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔?

Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010; Gagné & Godin, 2000

10


Methods - The Expectancy Value Framework 𝑳𝒊𝒌𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒉𝒐𝒐𝒅 𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒔𝒄𝒂𝒍𝒆

𝑬𝒗𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒔𝒄𝒂𝒍𝒆

1 𝑡𝑜 7

−3 𝑡𝑜 + 3

EVP= Expectancy-Value Product; Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010; Ajzen & Fishbein, 2008;

𝑬𝑽𝑷

=

−21 𝑡𝑜 + 21

11


Findings - breadth of the belief construct > Elicitation studies yielded insight into a broad range of aspects teachers consider when teaching about cancer education We tether biological content to a life-threatening disease. This is reasonable, because cancer is important, but it then becomes nearly impossible to solely focus on the factual level.

Teachers knowledge about cancer is limited. We are no physicians.

Students expect me to talk about cancer. I want to see if I can inspire my students with issues like cancer. teachers‘ statements from the elicitation studies Open-Ended Questionnaire: n=168, teachers (116 female, 52 male) Interviews: n=11, (8 female / 3 male)

12


Findings - salient beliefs, a focus on factual complexity > development of 66 closed belief items > teachers rated 49 of the 66 beliefs as salient

> most non-salient behavioural and control beliefs dealt with emotional aspects > e.g., teachers’ and students’ fears

4-point rating scale (1=disagree, …, 4=agree) to assess salience; Items with M .20 in all scales

15


Discussion – from a pessimistic to a more optimistic view of teaching cancer education > Detailed description of teachers beliefs with the help of the expectancy-valueframework (EVP) > EVP led to the formation of hypotheses about the relation of teachers‘ beliefs and the proximal influence factors attitudes, subjective norms, and behavioural control > Applying the Theory of Planned Behaviour gave special emphasis to belief aspects disregarded so far

DeVellis, 2017; Fives & Buehl, 2012; Carey et al. 1995a, 1995b

16

References Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2008). Scaling and Testing Multiplicative Combinations in the Expectancy-Value Model of Attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(9), 2222–2247. Barros, A., Moreira, L., Santos, H., Ribeiro, N., Carvalho, L., & Santos-Silva, F. (2014). "Cancer - Educate to Prevent"- high-school teachers, the new promoters of cancer prevention education campaigns. PLOS one, 9(5), 1–10. Baumert, J., & Kunter, M. (2006). Stichwort: Professionelle Kompetenz von Lehrkräften. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 9(4), 469–520. Carey, P. (1992). Teachers' attitudes to cancer education: a discussion in the light of a recent English survey. Journal of Cancer Education, 7(2), 153–161. Carey, P., Charlton, A., Sloper, P., & While, D. (1995). Cancer Education in Secondary Schools. Educational Review, 47(1), 101–111. Carey, P., Sloper, P., Charlton, A., & While, D. (1995). Cancer Education and the Primary School Teacher in England and Wales. Journal of Cancer Education, 10(1), 48–52. Cribb, A. (1990). School Teachers' Perceptions of the relative importance of cancer education in the United Kingdom. Journal of Cancer Education, 5(4), 225–229.

de Leeuw, A., Valois, P., Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2015). Using the theory of planned behavior to identify key beliefs underlying pro-environmental behavior in high-school students: Implications for educational interventions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 128–138. DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th edition). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne: Sage. Ekborg, M., Ottander, C., Silfver, E., & Simon, S. (2013). Teachers’ Experience of Working with Socio-scientific Issues: A Large Scale and in Depth Study. Research in Science Education, 43(2), 599–617.

Fensham, P. J. (2012). Preparing Citizens for a Complex World: The Grand Challenge of Teaching Socio-scientific Issues in Science Education. In A. Zeyer & R. Kyburz-Graber (Eds.), Science | Environment | Health. Towards a Renewed Pedagogy for Science Education (pp. 7–29). Dordrecht, New York: Springer.

17

References (cont‘d) Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York: Psychology Press. Fives, H., & Buehl, M. M. (2012). Spring cleaning for the “messy” construct of teachers’ beliefs: What are they? Which have been examined? What can they tell us? In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, T. Urdan, S. Graham, J. M. Royer, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), APA Educational Psychology Handbook, Vol 2: Individual Differences and Cultural and Contextual Factors (pp. 471–499). Washington: American Psychological Association. Gagné, C., & Godin, G. (2000). The theory of planned behavior: Some measurement issues concerning belief-based variables. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 2173– 2193. Jones, M. G., & Leagon, M. (2014). Science Teacher Attitudes and Beliefs: Reforming Practice. In Handbook of Research on Science Education, Volume II (pp. 830–847). New York: Routledge. Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Klusmann, U., Krauss, S., & Neubrand, M. (Eds.). (2013). Mathematics Teacher Education: Vol. 8. Cognitive Activation in the Mathematics Classroom and Professional Competence of Teachers: Results from the COACTIV project. New York: Springer.

Peraksilis, E. D., & Quintana, Y. (2012). The Global Need for Education on Cancer and Health. In Y. Quintana, Van Kirk Villalobos, Aubrey, & D. May (Eds.), Advancing Cancer Education and Healthy Living in Our Communities. Putting Visions and Innovations into Action (pp. 3–8). Amsterdam: IOS Press. Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science Education for Citizenship: Teaching Socio-Scientific Issues. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Tidemand, S., & Nielsen, J. A. (2017). The role of socioscientific issues in biology teaching: From the perspective of teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 39(1), 44–61. Zeyer, A., Keselman, A., & Levin, D. M. (2015). For the mutual benefit: Health information provision in the science classroom. In C. Arnott Smith & A. Keselman (Eds.), Meeting Health Information Needs Outside Of Healthcare. Opportunities and Challenges (pp. 235–261). Witney, Oxford, UK: Chandos Publishing.

18