In recent years, cries for reform in education in general, including science education, have come from many directions. Yager, Lutz, and Craven (1996) propose that general science education reform must be accompanied by reform in science teacher education as well. Suggestions for science education reform have come from a variety of interested parties: professional scientists, professors of science education, administrators in higher education, and government officials. Unfortunately, many if not most of the people who are informing and shaping reform in science education have little to no first-hand knowledge of the modern science classroom. The people who possess this knowledge, classroom teachers, are conspicuous by their reduced presence in -- or outright absence from -- reform efforts. This paucity of teacher input into reform may be a major contributing factor in the repeated failures of past reform efforts (Cuban 1990). In an attempt to redress this situation, this study seeks to inform the practice of science teacher education by discovering the needs of first year teachers, and those teachers' assessments of how well their preservice experience has helped them meet those needs.

Past studies of teacher needs and teacher preparation have been diminished in their usefulness to science education by being too general. Those studies which have focused on science teachers (see, for example, Baird and Rowsey 1989) have consulted teachers of all experience levels, thereby risking confusion of the needs of experienced teachers with those of beginners. Those studies which focus on beginning teachers, such as Covert, Williams and Kennedy (1991), consult teachers of all disciplines, thus running the risk of missing the special concerns of science teachers. The present study seeks to avoid both risks by focusing explicitly on the needs of beginning teachers of secondary school science, beginning with the student teaching experience and continuing into the first year of full time teaching.

Teachers have consistently downplayed the role of their preservice education classes in meeting their needs as beginning teachers. For example, of all the written comments in Covert, et al. (1991), only one teacher cited university education as being useful for successfully negotiating the first year of teaching. Respondents in a variety of surveys characterized their preservice education as too theoretical and irrelevant to the actual experience of teaching. Others are deeply critical of preservice education for painting an unrealistically positive picture of teaching. When this naive portrait clashes with the often harsh reality of classroom teaching, a "reality shock'" (Veenman 1984) may cause the teacher to become disillusioned with teaching, perhaps contributing to their leaving the profession. A comment from the Covert, et al. (1991) study is particularly illustrative:

...the first year teacher believes that this is going to be a truly enjoyable experience, only, in certain circumstances, to be faced with a pack of hungry animals. (p. 9)

The present study seeks to discover the needs of beginning teachers, and the ways in which preservice education succeeds and fails to meet these needs. The author believes that teachers themselves are the ultimate authority on these needs, and the ultimate evaluators of their education.. The research methodology will be qualitative in nature, driven by a naturalistic paradigm, employing methods detailed in Erlandson, Harris, Skipper, and Allen (1993) The reseach will seek to uncover the "lived reality" of the beginning teacher, seen through the eyes of the teachers. The choice of research methodology was inspired in part by Adams and Tillotson (1995), who caution education researchers against viewing teachers as "objects to be studied, rather than as collaborators" and stress the need for "communication about the nature of the teaching enterprise."

The present study consists of three phases.Eight student teachers in their final semester before student teaching participated in the first part of the study. These student teachers kept personal reflective journals with weekly entries; these journals will form part of the database. Seven members of this group participated in two "focus groups," one held two weeks into their student teaching, the other held three weeks before the end of the semester. During these focus group sessions, the student teachers placed on index cards words, phrases and even pictures which they felt described their expectations for teaching, and their actual teaching experiences. These index cards were placed on a wall and arranged by the student teachers into logical groups, which were then discussed and altered until consensus was reached. The data and categories so generated formed the bases for two sets of open-ended interview questions. Six of the student teachers each participated in three individual interviews. The first interview was entirely dedicated to the first set of interview questions. The first part of the second interview was spent in the process of "member checking." wherein the student teachers were asked to confirm, correct, or elaborate on the researcher's impressions of their statements in the first interview. This process is intended as a check on the interpretations of the researcher. The second half of the second interview concerned the second set of interview questions. The third interview was essentially a member checking session for the second interview.

The second phase has focused on one member from the first phase group during full-time teaching. This teacher was at a private institution. The teacher was interviewed approximately once every four weeks about his experiences in the classroom, and how those experiences related to his preservice education. Part of every interview beyond the first was occupied with member checking the data generated in previous interviews. 

The final phase will generate data with a qualitative "critical incident survey" where secondary science teachers of all experience levels will be asked to reflect on how well their preservice education prepared them to begin teaching. Paper copies of the survey will be passed out at professional conventions, and an electronic version is available on the World Wide Web at the URL. http://regcol.edb.utexas.edu/incident. 

The first phase results are emerging that agree somewhat with previous studies. Almost all respondents described the student teaching experience as "overwhelming," largely because of the intense demands of time, energy, and creativity. The student teachers were very concerned with classroom management and discipline, and most reported little or no support from their administrations on discipline matters. The teachers were also concerned with developing their own skills at organization, especially concerning issues of time management, creation of lesson plans, and administrative paperwork.

Although there were some instances of "reality shock," the phenomenon was not widespread among the teachers. In fact, many of the teachers reported a very negative impression of teaching going into their student teaching, prompted by warnings of student violence, difficulties with special-needs students, and potential legal problems teachers may fall victim to. The attitudes of most of the teachers as they began their student teaching were far from naive. The greatest instances of "reality shock" among the student teachers generally came in the prevalence of low student motivation. Many of the teachers confessed that they themselves were avid learners of science, and thus found it hard to relate to students who found learning science (and learning in general) boring. Creating interest in students for learning science was a consistent goal for all the teachers, and many felt that successfully motivating students to learn would subsequently solve many of their discipline problems.

When asked to describe and rate their various sources of support, information, and skills to "survive" their student teaching experience, none cited their preservice education as a major aid. All of them praised their fellow student teachers as major sources of ideas and support, both in and out of class. Many -- but not all -- also noted the important positive role of their host teachers in their professional development. When pressed to characterize their preservice education, the teachers used phrases like "busywork" and "waste of time." Having tasted the "real world" of the classsroom, the teachers judged their education classes to be too theoretical for the most part and not connected to real classroom situations. Some of the teachers found experiences such as classroom observations and microteaching practice sessions helpful, but all agreed that nothing is as effective as actual classroom experience.

In education classes, future science teachers are exhorted to always strive to present science in a way that demonstrates the connection between science and students' everyday lives, to promote student interest and self-motivation. The preliminary results of this research indicate that science teacher educators would do well to heed similar call, and for similar reasons. The participants in this study benefited little from their preservice classwork, and had little interest or motivation to devote themselves deeply to that work. The most common reason given for this lack of interest is the perceived irrelevance of most preservice class material to real classroom teaching. It is hoped that this study will give science teacher educators some of the insight needed to make preservice education more relevant, interesting, and helpful to prospective teachers, to better prepare teachers and to reduce beginning teacher "burnout."

Adams, P. E. & Tillotson, J. W. (1995). Why research in the service of science teacher education is needed. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 32 (5), 441-443.

Baird, W. E. and Rowsey, R. E. (1989). A survey of secondary science teachers' needs. School Science and Mathematics 89 (4), 272-284.

 Covert, J., Williams, L. & Kennedy, W. (1991). Some perceived professional needs of beginning teachers in Newfoundland. Alberta Journal of Educational Research 37 (1) 3-17.

 Cuban, L. (1990). Reforming again, again, and again. Educational Researcher 48, (1), 3-13.

 Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D.(1993). Doing Naturalistic Inquiry: A Guide to Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

 Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research 54, 143-178.

 Yager, R. E., Lutz, M. V., & Craven, J. A. (1996). Do national standards indicate the need for reform in science education reform? Journal of Science Teacher Education 7(2), 85-94.