View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Teacher Candidates' Perceptions of Scientists: Images and Attributes

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Teacher Candidates' Perceptions of Scientists: Images and Attributes
Language: English
Authors: McCarthy, Deborah
Source: Educational Review. 2015 67(4):389-413.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 25
Publication Date: 2015
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Tests/Questionnaires
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Preservice Teachers, Student Teacher Attitudes, Scientists, Scientific Attitudes, Stereotypes, Attribution Theory, Affective Measures, Freehand Drawing, Check Lists, Gender Differences, Comparative Analysis, Methods Courses, Methods Teachers, Education Majors, Statistical Analysis, Research Methodology, Questionnaires, Correlation, Interrater Reliability, Physical Characteristics, Work Environment, Cognitive Ability, Personality Traits
Geographic Terms: Louisiana
DOI: 10.1080/00131911.2014.974510
ISSN: 0013-1911
Abstract: The masculine image of scientists as elderly men wearing white coats and glasses, working alone in the laboratory has been documented since the 1950s. Because it is important that teacher candidates have a scientifically literate image of scientists due to the impact they have on their future students, this investigation is salient. This study involved the examination of drawings of scientists using the Draw-a-Scientist Test (DAST) and Draw-a-Science-Teacher-Test Checklist (DASTT-C) coupled with attributes listed by 91 teacher candidates enrolled in elementary education courses at an American university in south Louisiana. The purpose of this study was two-fold, first to investigate teacher candidates' images of scientists and second, to determine associated characteristics. Reasons for images, demographic information and facts concerning science courses were collected as contributing data. Images drawn by teacher candidates in a planning and assessment course were compared to those drawn by elementary methods students. Atypical drawings and those by male participants were analyzed separately. The overall results were encouraging. Certain items associated with the stereotypical image of scientists appeared in the 91 drawings while others were slightly represented or totally absent. Female scientists appeared in almost 48% of the drawings and smiling scientists were common. Some differences in percentages of items occurred between methods and planning/assessment teacher candidates. Various attributes were stereotypical but there were many exceptions. Some influencers identified by participants were electronic and print media, high school classes and college laboratories. Recommendations were the inclusion of science history and out-of-classroom experiences in methods courses.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 46
Entry Date: 2015
Accession Number: EJ1073289
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFrbeDICmE6C8_IpPJs3uqfAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDAyXu166zaOgEQBacgIBEICBm6EjYOTfPLDFluo5Hw8BLAi6Y8etDbvWVScUz0k96YZP3bGOZONJXxAAW3pP31gKjH9r0L0uevKzA4UCMwWCzekLaVJb-WavfAf7-bdebDLgbVOqRfEgoicVVPg6YKIiearWA99ChdG8q0MRc9MURwAMDjnkLKov_D-P0W1r8CFwk-mUBabJbfKobDHObtUMqpOC5cGMShc2R9By
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0109207889;edi01nov.15;2019Feb20.14:11;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0109207889-1">Teacher candidates’ perceptions of scientists: images and attributes. </title> <p>The masculine image of scientists as elderly men wearing white coats and glasses, working alone in the laboratory has been documented since the 1950s. Because it is important that teacher candidates have a scientifically literate image of scientists due to the impact they have on their future students, this investigation is salient. This study involved the examination of drawings of scientists using the Draw-a-Scientist Test (DAST) and Draw-a-Science-Teacher-Test Checklist (DASTT-C) coupled with attributes listed by 91 teacher candidates enrolled in elementary education courses at an American university in south Louisiana. The purpose of this study was two-fold, first to investigate teacher candidates' images of scientists and second, to determine associated characteristics. Reasons for images, demographic information and facts concerning science courses were collected as contributing data. Images drawn by teacher candidates in a planning and assessment course were compared to those drawn by elementary methods students. Atypical drawings and those by male participants were analyzed separately. The overall results were encouraging. Certain items associated with the stereotypical image of scientists appeared in the 91 drawings while others were slightly represented or totally absent. Female scientists appeared in almost 48% of the drawings and smiling scientists were common. Some differences in percentages of items occurred between methods and planning/assessment teacher candidates. Various attributes were stereotypical but there were many exceptions. Some influencers identified by participants were electronic and print media, high school classes and college laboratories. Recommendations were the inclusion of science history and out-of-classroom experiences in methods courses.</p> <p>Keywords: Draw-a-Scientist Test (DAST); images of scientists; attributes associated with scientists; teacher education</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The stereotyping of science as a masculine endeavor engaged in by elderly men in lab coats and glasses and its effect on attitudes has been recognized since the decade of the birth of rock and roll and Sputnik (McCarthy [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref1">28</reflink>]; Blin-Stoyle [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref2">5</reflink>]; Jones, Howe, and Rua [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref3">19</reflink>]). Because of the importance of teacher candidates developing scientifically literate images to impart to their future students, the researcher was curious to investigate what type of image 91 teacher candidates in the College of Education at an American university in south Louisiana held. Research says that images of scientists form by second grade and become more entrenched as students advance in their science education. According to studies some factors affecting images are: methods of science instruction, mass media, progression through science classes, role models and authentic out-of-classroom experiences. Therefore as contributing data, demographic information (including age), facts concerning science courses, including methods of instruction and reasons for images articulated during class discussions were collected.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-3">Literature review</hd> <p>Meade and Metraux ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref4">30</reflink>]) first documented the popular image of scientists held by American high school students in 1957 by analyzing the essays of 35,000 participants from both public and private schools. In this seminal study, they used three forms of prompts, some specifically directed to girls and others to boys. The image that emerged was that of an elderly man wearing a white coat and glasses, surrounded by test tubes in his laboratory doing dangerous things and keeping dangerous secrets. The participants described scientists as being surrounded by "test tubes and bunsen burners". They study subjects like "creepy and crawly things, the solar system, medicine and early man" through "research and experimentation" (p. 386). But participants also made comments like "careful, patient, courageous and understanding". Scientists worked for the betterment of mankind and the country, not themselves according to these students (p. 387). As a sidebar of the study, Meade and Metraux identified "the importance of participation (by students) as opposed to passive watching and on the role which the personality of the teacher plays in attitudes toward science" ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref5">30</reflink>], p. 388). They recommended that science be an active process beginning in kindergarten involving the observation of living things, not a duplication of a laboratory experiment already demonstrated by the teacher. Science history should be included, viewed as "a great adventure of mankind as a whole" and what scientists do and how they do it should be emphasized (p. 389). They also recognized girls as an untapped resource of science teachers and engineers and recommended that school counselors avoid dissuading girls from pursuing science-related careers.</p> <p>From 1966 to 1977, Chambers ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref6">6</reflink>]), developer of the Draw-a-Scientist Test (DAST) used in this study, collected student drawings of scientists in the place of verbal or written descriptions. Using the analysis completed by 81 undergraduates of the drawings by 4807 French and English-speaking children (K-5) across socio-economic levels, Chambers determined seven indicators: lab coat, eyeglasses, facial hair, symbols of research (laboratory equipment, etc.), symbols of knowledge (books, file cabinets), technology, and relevant captions (formulae, taxonomic keys). Chambers concluded that by second grade (ages 6–7) the stereotype reflecting the seven indicators begins and by the fourth and fifth grade (ages 8–10) "the image as a rule, has fully emerged" ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref7">6</reflink>], p. 260). Chambers also reported that even though 49% of the 4807 participants were girls only 28 women scientists were drawn, all by females and that socio-economics did affect the richness of the drawings. Concerning the instrument, Chambers proposed, "DAST is probably more useful in identifying than in measuring attitudes. Therefore, it may ultimately prove more useful in the construction of hypotheses than in the testing of them" ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref8">6</reflink>], p. 265).</p> <p>McDuffie ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref9">29</reflink>]) studied the images and associated attributes of 550 pre-service and in-service teachers. Roughly 60% of the participants were enrolled in elementary science methods classes and 80% were women. The participants completed the DAST and listed adjectives describing scientists and social scientists. The results were that 84% depicted males and 71% showed scientists as middle aged. Fifty-four percent drew their scientist in isolation surrounded by laboratory equipment, 50% were wearing lab coats and 43.7% were frowning. Attributes were categorized as personal or professional. Results were that about 50% described scientists as intelligent, 25% practical and 13% as "nerds". McDuffie noted the persistence of the stereotype and observed that there was virtually no difference between the attributes and sketches of pre-service and in-service teachers. McDuffie recommended that the study of scientists' biographies, speakers, and interviews with scientists, laboratory experiences, discussions about stereotypes in the media, field trips to show scientists' work and providing career information as possible ways to change stereotypical images.</p> <p>One factor identified in the literature and inventoried by the researcher is the influence of science instruction on the scientific images of teacher candidates. According to Thomas, Pedersen, and Finson ([<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref10">43</reflink>]), "Likely, the long history of traditional science learning experiences (in elementary school, high school, and college) powerfully impact the way in which elementary teachers understand the nature of science and the way in which science should be taught" (p. 295). Correspondingly, a study conducted by Elmas, Demirdogen, and Geban ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref11">10</reflink>]) involving 66 pre-service chemistry teachers from three Turkish universities using the Draw-a-Science-Teacher-Test Checklist (DASTT-C) suggested that pre-service teachers were affected by their school experiences as learners. The researchers concluded that science method courses must foster an inquiry-based approach to change learned pedagogy and recommended that teacher educators design methods courses "according to constructivist principles" ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref12">10</reflink>], p. 171).</p> <p>Lotter ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref13">25</reflink>]) concluded after her study of 13 secondary pre-service teachers conducted during their science methods course (only classroom observation was required) and their student teaching semester that there was a "need for further experience and instruction on inquiry-based learning" to shift the focus from the teacher to the student" (p. 36).</p> <p>In a [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref14">12</reflink>] study of the impact of teaching styles on student images of scientists, Finson, Pedersen, and Thomas stated "It is well documented that pre-service teachers hold vivid images of teaching based upon their experiences as students" ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref15">12</reflink>], para. 1). They recommended that even though no significant difference was found in student images of scientists due to the type of instruction (didactic to constructivist) using the DASTT-C, science educators should continue to pay attention to both teaching styles and student images in the delivery of pre-service and in-service science instruction. The researchers added that raw data showed a supportive tendency indicating that students of constructivist pre-service teachers would hold a more positive image of scientists.</p> <p>Research says the images of scientists become more entrenched as students age and advance through their science education (Baker and Leary [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref16">2</reflink>]; Christidou [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref17">7</reflink>]; Joyce and Farenga [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref18">20</reflink>]; Potter and Rosser [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref19">38</reflink>]; Wallace and Pedersen [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref20">46</reflink>]). The researcher was hopeful that in this study since 89% of the participants were in their twenties youth would be a positive influence.</p> <p>Considering this variable, Matthews and Davies ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref21">27</reflink>]) studied the images of 281 elementary students ages 5–11 and 132 secondary students ages 11–13. All students were asked to draw two scientists to allow for representations of collaboration and different genders. The elementary students (7–11) were asked to draw their scientists working and explain what they were doing. Secondary students (11–13) followed the same instructions, explained what influenced their drawings and reported if they planned to continue taking science courses. The researchers compared the gender and ethnicity of the drawings to their illustrators and noted stereotypical features. The trend that emerged was that as the students aged they drew more males, with six to eight year olds showing the most dramatic increase. "The image of a scientist as a white-coated chemist" became predominant (p. 81). The percentages of images showing collaboration indicated that the students did not see science as a social endeavor. The media and literature were recognized as influencers with school being a distant third especially by the five to seven year olds. School took on more importance at the secondary level. Matthews and Davies ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref22">27</reflink>]) recommended that teachers include life-histories of scientists and use materials that depict different cultures and genders. Their recommendation was based on the fact that one year after 8-9 year-old students researched the life of scientists, their drawings showed an increased number of female scientists and a "relatively large number of black scientists" (p. 84). They also advocated focusing on the nature of scientific inquiry rather than content, including social interaction between students and discussion of media-influenced images.</p> <p>Recently, Ozel ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref23">37</reflink>]) used the DAST to determine if advancing through grade levels affected the images of 243 students enrolled in kindergarten, third and fifth grades (5–10 years) in an elementary school in Turkey. Overall, the drawings were less stereotypical, but the researcher still found significant differences in stereotypical images in that fifth graders depicted scientists with more conventional elements in comparison to the kindergarteners and third graders. The author recommended field trips, meeting scientists in their social context and inviting scientists to class to alter images.</p> <p>Another influencing factor found in the research and supported by America's national science standards (with which the researcher concurs) is out-of-classroom experience (NGSS Lead States [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref24">36</reflink>]; National Research Council [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref25">34</reflink>]). This highlights the importance of field experience as a component of elementary methods courses for pre-service teacher candidates. Using the DASTT-C coupled with recall of science learning experiences and interviews, Thomas and Pedersen ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref26">42</reflink>]) studied the images of 150 pre-service methods students to determine perceptions of themselves as science teachers and the reasons for these images. Going into the field and actually doing science with elementary students emerged as a major theme in the qualitative data. The method students reported that their beliefs of what effective teaching looked like and what actually worked was confirmed through field experience.</p> <p>To plot self-efficacy beliefs in their ability to teach science through inquiry, Smolleck and Mongan ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref27">40</reflink>]) studied 38 pre-service elementary teachers. This mixed methods study followed the pre-service teachers from their science methods course into student teaching. The researchers reported that the methods students' most frequent comment was the desire for the inclusion of field experience in the course (23%) with the ability to actually teach elementary children (20%). The researchers noted the importance of this component and concluded that "They themselves (pre-service teachers) must experience how learning science as inquiry takes place within an elementary school setting" (Smolleck and Mongan [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref28">40</reflink>], p. 141).</p> <p>Miele ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref29">31</reflink>]) conducted a study of undergraduate science methods students, graduate students in elementary school science and environmental science, and undergraduate students in an inquiry-based science content course/field-based methods course using the DAST. Results showed a marked difference in stereotypical features between the undergraduate method students and graduate students with every feature occurring less frequently in the graduate students' drawings.</p> <p>The authors noted that the graduate students were:</p> <p>already working in urban settings as elementary school science specialists or as educators teaching children at informal science institutions such as museums or zoos ... they see science as something that they can do and that their students can so. This was supported by the results of the DAST .... (Miele [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref30">31</reflink>], p. 37)</p> <p>At the close of the semester, the undergraduate methods students repeated the DAST. Images were significantly less stereotypical. Results of post-test drawings of the graduate students showed a further reduction in stereotypical features.</p> <p>The undergraduate students in the inquiry-based science content course/field-based methods course reported that their images after completing the course were substantially different from what they would have drawn on the first day of class. Three of the 18 participants drew their science education professors as did the graduate students.</p> <p>From young students' perspective, what influences the scientific images they hold? Turkmen's ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref31">44</reflink>]) study of 287 Turkish fifth graders used the DAST and a questionnaire asking students to explain what their scientists were doing and how they learned about scientists. The purpose of the study was to determine if a new science/technology course impacted images. In general, the study revealed stereotypical images similar to those held by Western students. Turkmen reported that male images (94.1%) that were elderly (69.7%), working in the laboratory (79.8%), and wearing lab coats (46.7%) were predominant. Ethnic diversity was practically non-existent. The primary source influencing images that students reported was their teachers (61.3%) with media at 41.8%. Parents and friends were also named. Turkmen stated that teachers can identify and modify student images early on. He suggested that teachers introduce science careers, use science history from textbooks and invite scientists from the community (role models) to speak to young children.</p> <p>Narayan, Park, and Peker ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref32">32</reflink>]) and Narayan et al. ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref33">33</reflink>]) conducted two international studies involving over 1200 students in Grades/Years 3, 7, and 10 from India, South Korea, Turkey, China and the United States. The DAST was utilized in conjunction with drawings depicting students doing science and a short description. Drawings were evaluated using the DASTT-C. The researchers found that the type of teaching approach, when, and how often science was taught affected images. However, overall the stereotypical masculine image of the scientist was predominant across all four countries. The authors suggested that public attitude toward science and technology impact attitudes and images as well as family involvement in school. They recommended the use of role models to modify perceptions.</p> <p>Christidou ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref34">7</reflink>]) also emphasized the influence teachers have on their students in this statement, "Hence, the teachers' views and attitudes towards science have an impact on the respective views and attitudes of their students" (p. 146). Addressing student interests, self-reflection resulting in revision of images, appealing to the affect, humanizing scientists and modifying teaching practices were recommended. Meade and Metraux articulated this relationship almost 60 years ago.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-4">Purpose of the study</hd> <p>The purpose of this study was two-fold: first, to investigate education majors' perceptions of scientists in the College of Education at an American university in south Louisiana and second, to determine the characteristics they associated with scientists. The researcher was also interested in the age of the participants, gender, type of instruction, number of science courses, and reasons given for images as contributing data. Drawings and questionnaire data of science/social studies/language arts methods students were compared to planning/assessment students. Questionnaire data, attributes, atypical drawings and drawings by male participants were thoroughly analyzed to discover any patterns. Accordingly, the researcher was curious to investigate if the stereotypical image of scientists identified 30 years ago in Chambers' DAST is still alive and well in an average college classroom.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-5">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0109207889-6">Participants</hd> <p>A convenient sample of 91 teacher candidates in the College of Education at an American university in south Louisiana were the participants in this study. Sixty-three were enrolled in the course, Instructional Planning and Assessment. The course objectives were to design lesson plans and assessments in science or social studies accompanied by 10 hours of direct instruction in the field usually in the form of tutoring small groups in content dictated by the classroom teacher. Fifteen participants were enrolled in the methods course, Curriculum and Instruction in the Elementary School (Grades/Years 1–5) and thirteen were enrolled in the methods course, Upper Elementary Curriculum and Instruction (Grades/Years 4–8). The methods courses are co-taught by a language arts instructor and the researcher who is responsible for the science and social studies components. Methods students created lesson plans for one week then taught science content for two weeks and social studies content for two weeks in local schools. Everyone created science learning cycles, a constructivist hands-on strategy, which they presented in class and judged a regional science fair. Eighty-three participants were pre-service, and eight were earning alternative certification. These students held a Bachelor's or graduate degree in another field and were working towards state teacher certification. The majority of the 91 participants were White females in their twenties who had progressed through four or more science courses in high school and college (see Table 1).</p> <p>Table 1. Teacher candidate demographics (n = 91).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr valign="top"><td>Gender</td><td>Race</td><td>Age range<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0001">a</xref></td><td>Years entering High School<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0002">b</xref></td><td>Four or more science courses taken</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr valign="top"><td>Female 94.5%</td><td>White 92.3%</td><td>20–29 years 89.0%</td><td>1980s–1990s 19.7%</td><td>High School 68.1%</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>Male 5.4%</td><td>Black 7.6%</td><td>30–49 years 8.7%</td><td>2000s 79.2%</td><td>College 75.8%</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 Age 19 – one teacher candidate; age 52 – one teacher candidate.</p> <p>2 1970s one teacher candidate.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-7">Instrumentation</hd> <p>The researcher utilized the DAST developed in 1983 by Chambers. The DAST in this study provided the following prompt: Below, illustrate what you think a scientist looks like. Place any items that you feel belong in the illustration with your scientist. The participants were also asked to list attributes they associated with scientists and be prepared for discussion. This allowed for a more thorough understanding of the perceptions of the participants. The second instrument used was the DASTT-C developed in [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref35">11</reflink>] by Finson, Beaver and Cramond to quantify scores for drawings (see Appendix A). Using analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedures, the analysis established an inter-rater reliability of 0.96 to 0.98 for the DASTT-C. The instrument used in this study had 14 indicators associated with the standardized image of scientists. They were: lab coat, eye glasses, facial hair, symbols of research (laboratory equipment, etc.), and symbols of knowledge, technology, relevant captions, male gender, Caucasian, middle age/elderly, mythic stereotypes, indications of secrecy, scientists working indoors and indications of danger. Two were added by the researcher: smiles and wild hair. To establish reliability of the data, the present researcher recruited the following to analyze the drawings using the DAST-C: the present researcher (Rater 1), a chemical engineer and former university professor for 10 years (Rater 2), and a third grade teacher for over 40 years who taught second and third grade science (Rater 3). A questionnaire developed by the researcher was used to collect the information: age, gender, years attending high school and college, courses taken and methods of science instruction (see Appendix B). A class discussion involving 51 teacher candidates took place regarding the reasons for the images on the drawings.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-8">Procedure</hd> <p>At the beginning of class, the researcher explained the study and requested that the teacher candidates read and sign a consent form approved by the university's Institutional Review Board. The DAST was introduced by citing the publication of McDuffie's [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref36">29</reflink>] study of 550 pre-service and in-service teachers to emphasize the seriousness of the task. After distributing the questionnaire (see Appendix B) and the DAST prompt, the researcher read the instructions, repeating those regarding the listing of attributes. No time limit was set. Markers were provided to encourage detail in the drawings. A class discussion involving 51 teacher candidates followed regarding the reasons for the images on the drawings.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-9">Data analysis</hd> <p>Inter-rater reliability using Cohen's kappa coefficient (<emph>κ</emph>) and Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients (<emph>r</emph>) were determined using PASW Statistics 18 software. To score the drawings, the three raters placed a check next to the items they saw in the drawings and a question mark if they were unsure. Question marks were considered as unchecked. The data was entered as zero or one. Total scores of the drawings for the three raters were compared and Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients (<emph>r</emph>) were generated.</p> <p>For all drawings, percentages of occurrence indicated by the raters' check marks were calculated for each of the 14 indicators plus the additional two. To determine if the perceptions of teacher candidates in the two methods courses differed from those in the planning and assessment course, separate percentages were computed.</p> <p>To begin the cross-case thematic analysis of the lists of attributes, the researcher read the comments of one class. Categories began to emerge which reflected the repetition of attributes. Descriptive words were used for coding then percentages were calculated to verify the groupings as major themes (Creswell [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref37">8</reflink>]). To organize the themes, thematic conceptual matrices were developed using direct quotes from the teacher candidates.</p> <p>Using the questionnaire data, the researcher analyzed the demographics, the amount of science courses and methods of instruction then converted each into percentages. Comments during class discussions regarding the reasons for the images were recorded. Methods students' drawings and attributes were compared to planning/assessment students. Drawings and attributes of atypical images identified by at least two of the three raters were particularly analyzed, coupled with questionnaire data to determine any patterns. Drawings by male participants were also examined separately.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-10">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0109207889-11">Analysis of DASTT-C</hd> <p>Inter-rater reliability was established for all items by calculating the values for Cohen's kappa using PASW Statistics 18. All kappa values were in the moderate to substantial agreement range with the exception of Item 7 which showed slight agreement between Raters 1 and 3. This could be attributed to lack of clarity concerning what constitutes a caption. Items 3 and 9 were classified as almost perfect and Items 11 and 12 were interpreted as constants. It appears this occurred because Items 11 and 12 were not checked (0) by any of the raters (Landis and Koch [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref38">23</reflink>]; Viera and Garrett [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref39">45</reflink>]) (see Table 2).</p> <p>Table 2. Kappa values for DASTT-C and two additional items (n = 91).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr valign="top"><td>Items</td><td><italic>κ</italic> Values</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td /><td>Rater 1, Rater 2</td><td>Rater 1, Rater 3</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr valign="top"><td>1. Lab coat</td><td char=".">0.533</td><td char=".">0.652</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>2. Eye glasses</td><td char=".">0.706</td><td char=".">0.866</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>3. Facial hair</td><td char=".">1.000</td><td char=".">1.000</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>4. Research (laboratory equipment)</td><td char=".">0.889</td><td char=".">0.862 </td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>5. Knowledge</td><td char=".">0.693</td><td char=".">0.448</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>6. Technology</td><td char=".">0.824</td><td char=".">0.683</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>7. Captions</td><td char=".">0.740</td><td char=".">0.013</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>8. Male</td><td char=".">0.446</td><td char=".">0.693</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>9. Caucasian</td><td char=".">1.000</td><td char=".">1.000</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>10. Middle aged/elderly</td><td char=".">0.449</td><td char=".">0.418</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>11. Mythic stereotypes</td><td><sub>.</sub>a</td><td><sub>.</sub>a (constant) </td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>12. Secrecy</td><td><sub>.</sub>a</td><td><sub>.</sub>a (constant) </td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>13. Working indoors</td><td char=".">0.808</td><td char=".">0.592 </td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>14. Indications of danger</td><td char=".">0.710</td><td char=".">0.483</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>15. Smile</td><td char=".">0.435</td><td char=".">0.584 </td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>16. Wild hair</td><td char=".">0.438</td><td char=".">0.680</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>A Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was computed to assess the relationship between the total scores of the 91 drawings examined by Rater 1 (the researcher) and Rater 2, and then and Rater 1 and Rater 3 to establish the reliability of the researcher's analysis. There was a strong or high positive correlation between total scores for Rater 1 and Rater 2, <emph>r</emph> = 0.846. There was also a strong or high positive correlation between total scores for Rater 1 and Rater 3, <emph>r</emph> = 0.836 indicating an overall strong agreement in the analysis of the drawings (Hinkle, Wiersma, and Jurs [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref40">15</reflink>]) (see Table 3).</p> <p>Table 3. Correlation coefficients for Rater 1, Rater 2, Rater 3 totals.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr valign="top"><td>Correlations</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td /><td>Rater 1 total</td><td>Rater 2 total</td><td>Rater 3 total</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr valign="top"><td>Rater 1 total</td><td>Pearson correlation</td><td>1</td><td>0.846<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0003">**</xref></td><td>0.836<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0003">**</xref></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td /><td>significant (two-tailed)</td><td /><td>0.000</td><td>0.000</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td /><td><italic>N</italic></td><td>91</td><td>91</td><td>91</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>Rater 2 total</td><td>Pearson correlation</td><td>0.846<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0003">**</xref></td><td>1</td><td>0.765<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0003">**</xref></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td /><td>significant (two-tailed)</td><td>0.000</td><td /><td>0.000</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td /><td><italic>N</italic></td><td>91</td><td>91</td><td>91</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>Rater 3 total</td><td>Pearson correlation</td><td>0.836<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0003">**</xref></td><td>0.765<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0003">**</xref></td><td>1</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td /><td>significant (two-tailed)</td><td>0.000</td><td>0.000</td><td /></tr><tr valign="top"><td /><td><italic>N</italic></td><td>91</td><td>91</td><td>91</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-12">Analysis of DAST using DASTT-C</hd> <p>Percentages were calculated for each of the 14 items plus the two additional indicators for the three raters. Because of the strength of correlation and kappa values, the researcher was confident in reporting the average percentages of the results of the DASTT-C. Seventy-eight percent of the participants drew their scientists in lab coats; 81.3% surrounded them with laboratory equipment and 73.6% placed them in an indoor environment (see Figures 1 and 2).</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Example of a drawing of a female scientist: female planning/assessment student (age 27).</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Example of a drawing of a male scientist: male methods student (age 22).</p> <p>Research (laboratory equipment) was prevalent as well as glasses/goggles. Facial hair, mythic stereotypes, secrecy, danger and elderly images were barely represented or absent. An unexpected statistic was the average percentage of participants putting a smile on their scientist's face (78.3%) although this has been documented in other studies (Narayan et al. [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref41">32</reflink>]; Turkmen [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref42">44</reflink>]). Because of the large discrepancy between Rater 3 and the remaining raters on Item 7 <emph>captions</emph>, the researcher omitted Rater 3's percentage from the average (see Table 4). A single drawing portrayed two figures and one depicted a Black scientist even though there were seven Black participants. Two drawings illustrated scientists with wily expressions and one included the caption "toxic".</p> <p>Table 4. Average percentages of raters for DASTT-C and two additional items (n = 91).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr valign="top"><td>Items</td><td>Average percentages</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr valign="top"><td>1. Lab coat</td><td char=".">78.7 </td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>2. Eye glasses</td><td char=".">60.0</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>3. Facial hair</td><td char=".">1.0</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>4. Research (laboratory equipment)</td><td char=".">81.3</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>5. Knowledge</td><td char=".">42.0</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>6. Technology</td><td char=".">18.2</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>7. Captions</td><td char=".">37.3<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0004">*</xref></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>8. Male</td><td char=".">52.6</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>9. Caucasian</td><td char=".">98.9</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>10. Middle aged/elderly</td><td char=".">13.4</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>11. Mythic stereotypes</td><td char=".">0 </td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>12. Secrecy</td><td char=".">0</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>13. Working indoors</td><td char=".">73.6</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>14. Indications of danger</td><td char=".">4.3</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>15. Smile</td><td char=".">78.3</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>16. Wild hair</td><td char=".">25.9</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>4 Because of the large discrepancy between Rater 3 and the remaining raters on Item 7, the researcher omitted Rater 3's percentage from the average.</p> <p>Since the attribute of gender is salient in most studies, separate percentages were calculated and undecided genders were omitted rather than reporting for <emph>n</emph> = 91. Percentages were as follows: Rater 1 at 65.1%, Rater 2 at 40.5% and Rater 3 at 52.3% with the average being 52.6%. This is an encouraging statistic with regards to stereotypical images and roles based on gender.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-13">Comparison of planning/assessment students and methods students</hd> <p>To determine if the images of teacher candidates in the science/social studies/language arts methods courses (<emph>n</emph> = 28) varied from those in the planning/assessment course (<emph>n</emph> = 63), separate average percentages were computed. The major difference between the two groups was that before the DAST was administered all teacher candidates had observed a science teacher instructing and judged a science fair during which students in fourth to sixth grades (ages 8–11) explained their projects to the methods students. They also worked cooperatively to develop a science learning cycle and carried out one activity with the methods class. Many had planned science lessons and gone into local schools to teach. The process of designing science lessons and teaching them encompassed three weeks of the semester. The planning/assessment teacher candidates only designed science lessons if they selected science content to build their lessons plans around but did not implement them. They were required to teach in local schools and could assist at the Louisiana Children's Discovery Center, a science-oriented hands-on museum for 10 hours. However what they taught was determined by the teacher whose classroom they were visiting which could be any subject area. The items with average percentages appreciably different were Item 8 <emph>male gender</emph>, Item 13 <emph>indoors</emph>, and Item 16 <emph>wild hair</emph>. The average percentage of methods students drawing males was 35.7 while 53.4% of the planning/assessment students depicted men. For Item 13 <emph>indoors</emph>, 66.8% of the methods students drew their scientists inside versus 77.2% drawn by the planning/assessment students. Using average percentages, the most telling difference was that 64% of the illustrations by the methods students depicted female scientists working outdoors (33.2%) (see Table 5). The average age of the methods students was 25; the average age of the planning/assessment students was 22. Methods students completed an average of seven college science courses while planning/assessment students completed five. This is logical, considering that the majority of planning/assessment students are in their third year of college and the methods students are in their final year. The majority of both methods and planning/assessment students described the type of science instruction they experienced as discovery, inquiry-based, hands-on and exploratory including labs and lecture. Age, type of instruction and advancement through science courses were similar. As documented in the literature review, research says that out-of-the classroom experiences influence images of scientists (Christidou [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref43">7</reflink>]; McDuffie [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref44">29</reflink>]; NGSS Lead States [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref45">36</reflink>]; National Research Council [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref46">34</reflink>]). Again, most methods students observed, planned then taught science content in the field for two–weeks, judged a science fair. However compelling, it is speculative to infer that these out-of-the classroom experiences were the primary factors that encouraged the depiction of women scientists in the drawings.</p> <p>Table 5. Comparison of planning/assessment students and methods students (n = 91).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr valign="top"><td>Items</td><td>Average percentages</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>Assessment/planning <italic>n</italic> = 63</td><td>Methods <italic>n</italic> = 28</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr valign="top"><td>1. Lab coat</td><td char=".">78.8</td><td char=".">78.5</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>2. Eye glasses</td><td char=".">61.8</td><td char=".">55.9</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>3. Facial hair</td><td char=".">0.0</td><td char=".">3.5</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>4. Research (laboratory equipment)</td><td char=".">83.0</td><td char=".">77.3</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>5. Knowledge</td><td char=".">51.8</td><td char=".">52.3</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>6. Technology</td><td char=".">16.8</td><td char=".">21.4</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>7. Captions</td><td char=".">38.8<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0005">*</xref></td><td char=".">33.7<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="TFN0005">*</xref></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>8. Male</td><td char=".">53.4</td><td char=".">35.7</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>9. Caucasian</td><td char=".">98.4</td><td char=".">98.6</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>10. Middle aged/elderly</td><td char=".">13.7</td><td char=".">12.3</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>11. Mythic stereotypes</td><td char=".">0.0</td><td char=".">0.0</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>12. Secrecy</td><td char=".">0.0</td><td char=".">0.0</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>13. Working indoors</td><td char=".">77.2</td><td char=".">66.8</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>14. Indications of danger</td><td char=".">5.2</td><td char=".">3.5</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>15. Smile</td><td char=".">83.5</td><td char=".">85.6</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>16. Wild hair</td><td char=".">32.0</td><td char=".">11.8</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>5 Because of the large discrepancy between Rater 3 and the remaining raters on Item 7, the researcher omitted Rater 3's percentage from the average.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-14">Analysis of attributes (n = 88)</hd> <p>Of the 91 participants, 88 listed attributes they associated with scientists. After completing a cross-case thematic analysis, four themes emerged: <emph>Appearance</emph>, <emph>Workplace Environment</emph>, <emph>Cognitive Abilities</emph> and <emph>Personality</emph> (Creswell [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref47">8</reflink>]). Of the 88 participants, 37.5% established the first theme – <emph>Appearance</emph>. Comments found in other studies such as "white males", "old", "stained button down shirts", "eyes are red from lack of sleep" and "women" were noted. Several wrote positive descriptions like scientists "can dress nice – not have to be dorky", "clean cut" and "They do not have to wear big glasses and white coats".</p> <p>The second theme of <emph>Workplace Environment</emph> was established by 31.8% of the participants. The teacher candidates pictured the environment usually described as having "black laboratory tables", "beakers, chemicals", "board with equations", "posters or models of scientific ideas", "graphs, test tubes, charts" and "old books". Some indicated that the environment can be "both in laboratory and in the field", "laboratory can be anywhere", including "outside adventures to explore plants and animals".</p> <p>The third theme was <emph>Cognitive Abilities</emph> with 82.9% listing attributes associated with thought processes. Many wrote "smart" or "intelligent", the usual attributes. Some were more specific with comments like "analytical", "good in math", "innovative", "thinks outside the box" and "creating hypotheses and theories", "precise" and "observant".</p> <p>The final theme was <emph>Personality</emph>. Seventy-five percent listed attributes that described perceptions of personality. Some comments were stereotypical such as scientists are "geeky', "weird", "crazy" "strait-laced", and "anti-social", "not compassionate", a "lone star", "hates to be wrong", "obsessive" and "unable to understand others' ways of thinking" with a "strange sense of humor". Many were positive. They described scientists as being "honest", "put together", "brave", "like any other person", "understanding", "patient" and a "good listener". Some saw scientists as being "passionate" with a "love of science". Scientists "want to help all students to learn and understand the material". They are "explorer(s)" and are "okay with their thoughts being disproved even after years of believing in a certain way". One 20 year old male teacher candidate in the planning/assessment course wrote a very illuminating attribute. The phrase read " "Typical geek" – according to society" (see Table 6).</p> <p>Table 6. Cross-case thematic analysis of attributes (n = 88).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr valign="top"><td /><td>Percentage</td><td>Examples</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr valign="top"><td>Appearance</td><td char=".">37.5</td><td>Normal, skinny, does not fix hair, dress casual</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>Workplace environment</td><td char=".">31.8</td><td>Equipment and books, petri dishes, computers, test tubes</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>Cognitive abilities</td><td char=".">82.9</td><td>Deep thinking, solve problems, collects data, analytical</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td>Personality</td><td char=".">75</td><td>Dedicated, weird, desire for the unknown, frazzled, honest</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>The following comments by a 25 year old male teacher candidate from the planning/assessment course reflected a common perception of scientists with the exception of his reference to "prank wars", a recent college phenomenon involving practical jokes. The student wrote:</p> <p>When I picture a, "scientist" I automatically think of what our society would label as a, "dork". I see them as bright! Almost too bright. I'm not beyond thinking of many as being socially awkward. But I bet they would be great at being in a prank war. They're smart, yet mostly likely difficult to understand or relate to.</p> <p>In contrast to such a stereotypical description, a 21 year old female teacher candidate in the methods class listed the following attributes: "logical thinker, wide variety of ethnic backgrounds, both males and females, intelligent, analytical, many years of education, introverts and extroverts, curious". For the researcher, it was encouraging to find that 68 of the 88 participants (77%) attributed positive qualities to their scientists.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-15">Analysis of atypical drawings</hd> <p>Of the 91 drawings examined, 11 were deemed atypical by at least two of the raters, in most cases by all three. These participants were females ranging in age from 21 to 52 years, however the majority (eight) were in their twenties. They progressed through two to five high school science courses averaging three courses and two to 19 college courses, averaging seven. These teacher candidates listed laboratories or experiments and several used "hands-on", to describe their experiences.</p> <p>In these drawings, scientists wore regular clothing, had normal hair styles, and were smiling. A 27 year old female planning/assessment student depicted a black female (see Figure 3). One drawing by a 21 year old methods teacher candidate displayed a girl and a boy in a classroom with musical notes emanating from a CD player (see Figure 4).</p> <p>Graph: Figure 3. Example of an atypical drawing: female planning/assessment student (age 27).</p> <p>Graph: Figure 4. Example of an atypical drawing: female methods student (age 21).</p> <p>Seven of the 11 drawings (63%) depicted females, which is noteworthy. Two were drawn outside in a marine environment, one by a 52 year old teacher candidate in the science/social studies/language arts methods course who progressed through 11 college science courses and another by a 28 year old in the planning/assessment course taking 19 college courses. The methods teacher candidate who completed 11 courses, specifically mentioned Plant Science and going into the field at Roan Mountain in Tennessee. The planning/assessment participant who completed 19 science courses mentioned laboratories and reported taking courses such as Biology of Marine Mammals, Cetacean Behavior and Vertebrate Zoology. Additionally, she listed a zoo keeping internship which implies working with experienced keepers (role models) in an authentic outside-of-the-classroom environment (see Figure 5). A third teacher candidate who completed seven college courses described her Field Biology course as "It was an outside experience". For these two participants, it appears that neither age nor advancement through science courses fostered stereotypical images as suggested in the literature. The researcher realizes that these participants could simply have an innate interest in science. Each experienced out-of-the-classroom activities. However intriguing, it would be speculative to deem these experiences as <emph>the</emph> significant influencer.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 5. Example of an atypical drawing: female planning/assessment student (age 28).</p> <p>There were negative attributes on two atypical drawings like: "messy hair", "semi nerdy", and "boring". However a sizable majority were very positive. Some examples were: "smart", "has a good imagination", "open-minded", "wide variety of ethnic backgrounds", "both males and females", "(hopefully) not biased", "normal", "multicultural, men and women, creativity, intellectual honesty", detailed-oriented", and "openness to new ideas".</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-16">Analysis of drawings by male participants</hd> <p>Because there were so few male participants (five), the researcher examined their drawings, attributes and questionnaire data separately. The average age of the male participants was 23 years. The average number of science courses completed was four in high school and five in college. All described lecture as being the primary method of instruction, with laboratories provided on occasion. The drawings were of males wearing glasses or goggles surrounded by laboratory equipment. Tests tubes were common, two with smoking chemicals. One depicted his scientist holding a hypodermic needle and another included the caption "Talk "Nerdy" To Me" on his scientist's collar-less shirt. He also used the labels "dork" and "socially awkward" (see block quote) as attributes. All acknowledged scientists as being "intelligent' and "smart". There were negative comments such as "geek", "hates being wrong", "lone star" but positive ones such as "progressive", "fearless" and "patient". One drawing in particular from a 21 year old methods student who had completed six high school science courses and nine college courses did not match his apparent affinity for science (see Figure 6). However, his explanations painted a scientifically literate picture. He included the light bulb because scientists are "innovative thinkers, come up with new ideas to better the world around them". Accordingly, he asserted that lab coats are normal attire for laboratory work and glasses are associated with intelligence. The equipment permits scientists to "experiment to test new ideas". For this teacher candidate, progression through science courses did not appear to foster a conventional description of a scientist even though the drawing was very stereotypical, including the devious smile and bald head. A second drawing by a 27 year old planning/assessment student who had completed four science courses in high school and two in college followed the same pattern. This scientist had no mouth, wore goggles and was dressed in what appeared to be a hazardous materials or radiation suit. But his attributes included "dedicated", "ok with failing" and a "pioneer".</p> <p>Graph: Figure 6. Example of drawing by male participant: methods student (age 21).</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-17">Class conversation regarding influencing factors</hd> <p>The researcher asked 51 participants to give reasons to support their drawings via a discussion with a planning/assessment class of 23 and teacher candidates in two methods courses of 15 and 13. The comments recorded by the researcher included electronic media like the American television shows Bill Nye the Science Guy, Dexter, NCIS and the Big Bang Theory, movies, textbooks, cartoons, children's books, the news, photographs and educational videos. The participants also included science classes in high school, laboratories in college, interviews, field trips and personal experience as influencers.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-18">Discussion</hd> <p>The purpose of this study was two-fold, first, to investigate education majors' perceptions of scientists in the College of Education at an American university in south Louisiana and second, to determine the characteristics they associated with scientists. The researcher was also interested in the age of the participants, gender, type of instruction, number of science courses and reasons for images as contributing data. From the data collected using the DAST and DASTT-C, it became evident that the participants associated some of the stereotypical characteristics with their image of scientists. The majority drew Caucasian figures wearing lab coats and eye glasses working indoors, using laboratory equipment and books.</p> <p>The participants seldom drew scientists that were obviously elderly (13.4%) or had facial hair (1%). The average percentage of female scientists drawn in this study whose gender could definitely be identified (47.4%) was noteworthy. This suggests that perhaps some progress has been made over the years in altering the male stereotype (Matthews and Davies [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref48">27</reflink>]; Meade and Metraux [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref49">30</reflink>]; McDuffie [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref50">29</reflink>]). A very striking statistic regarding gender came from the science/social studies/language arts methods students whose drawings, using average percentages, depicted almost 63% of their scientists as females. As noted, all methods students had observed science teachers, designed science learning cycles and judged a science fair. Many had developed and taught science lessons in the field.</p> <p>As the researcher began examining the drawings, a feature that surfaced almost immediately was the number of smiling faces. Over 78% of the participants drew a happy scientist which appears to temper the idea that students still see scientists as menacing, ominous, unapproachable, serious individuals but instead view them as friendly and rather proud of their work (Christidou [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref51">7</reflink>]; McDuffie [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref52">29</reflink>]; Meade and Metraux [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref53">30</reflink>]). A conspicuous finding was the absence of diversity in the drawings. Even though there were seven Black participants in the study, only one Black scientist appeared. Negative personality traits such as <emph>geeky</emph> and <emph>nerdy</emph> were found in this study (16%) but the vast majority of attributes were positive.</p> <p>Questionnaire data and DAST images for all 91 participants showed that three of the 11 participants in their thirties through fifties produced atypical drawings. Of the nine participants in the study who advanced through more than 10 college science courses, two fashioned atypical drawings. Another finding in this study, contrary to research, was that advancement through science courses did not result in stereotypical images of scientists for these participants.</p> <p>A surprising finding was that youth did not appear to influence images as the researcher thought. Considering that 89% of the participants were 20 to 29 years of age and only 8.7% were between 30 and 49 years, (one was 19, another 52) the researcher anticipated more realistic images from such an informed generation and schools' attempts over the years to provide pedagogically improved science educational experiences. In fact, those participants in their twenties averaged 5.7 stereotypical indicators in their drawings while those in their thirties and forties averaged 4.9 stereotypical indicators.</p> <p>Additionally, of the 11 atypical drawings, eight participants were in their twenties, two in their thirties and one in her fifties, an age range spanning three decades. The male participants, all in their twenties, drew extremely stereotypical scientists. Positive and negative attributes were written by all age groups. The ages of the 16% who described scientists as nerds or dorks ranged from 19 to 34 years with only one being a methods student; the others were in the planning/assessment course. However, the researcher realizes that DAST is a brief snapshot of perceptions and other factors could certainly be involved.</p> <p>In this study almost 100% of the participants reported in the researcher's questionnaire that they participated in labs/experiments combined with lecture. Some described experiences in their college courses as "hands-on". One 22 year old female methods student commented on the questionnaire, "The classes I remember most were the ones we did hands-on activities". In contrast, a 23 year old female in the planning/assessment course expressed her dissatisfaction with Physics 142, a completely hands-on course. She wrote, "I thought the class was pointless and could not wait until it was over". Twenty-seven percent listed other experiences such as internet use, simulators, projects and field experiences. During the class discussions, the participants mentioned high school classes, college laboratories, personal experience and interviews as influencing factors.</p> <p>In opposition to past studies, there were very low average percentages quantified using the DASTT-C for the standard items of facial hair, middle age/elderly and indications of danger as well as the absence of mythic stereotypes and secrecy depicted in the DAST. As discussed in the literature review, the type of instruction and role models affect images. Are these students considering their instructors as role models in place of what is portrayed in the media? Conversely, the percentages were high for laboratory equipment and working indoors, a reflection of the usual environment in which students experience science.</p> <p>The attributes listed were both negative and positive regarding appearance and personality. The terms "nerdy", "geeky" and "dorky" were found in 16% of the responses but as noted, several attributes mirrored basic human qualities such as "creative", "inventive", "passionate" and "enthusiastic about the field they work in".</p> <p>The cognitive abilities were very positive. The participants wrote attributes like "open-minded", "skeptical", "precise", "observant", "curious" and "honest". However, elements associated with the workplace environment were standard with these few exceptions "laboratory can be anywhere", "both in the laboratory and in the field" and "outside adventures to explore plants and animals". In general, the attributes associated with scientists were positive. Seventy-seven percent wrote affirmative qualities.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-19">Recommendations</hd> <p>From the results of this study, the researcher suggests that the items of <emph>secrecy</emph> and <emph>mythic stereotypes</emph> could be eliminated from the DASTT-C instrument for older students and that <emph>facial expression (smile)</emph> be added. Derived from the DASTT-CR (revised) developed by Matkins in 1996, Jones and Bangert ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref54">18</reflink>]) omitted these items based on a pilot study they conducted preceding their research on media's effect on images. It appears that these features have become much less significant and could dilute the strength of measuring for stereotypical images (Turkmen [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref55">44</reflink>]).</p> <p>Although the researcher was greatly encouraged by the percentage of female scientists, lack of elderly wild-haired males and numerous positive attributes, continuous interventions are needed to inform images that are more scientifically literate. From experience in teaching elementary science for over 30 years and based on studies, the researcher recommends that inquiry-based learning incorporating real-life problems should be part of every science educator's pedagogy beginning in the early grades. This type of pedagogy should be modeled in elementary science methods courses (Bleicher and Lindgren [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref56">4</reflink>]; Gelabert [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref57">14</reflink>]; Jeanpierre [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref58">17</reflink>]; Martin [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref59">26</reflink>]; NGSS Lead States [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref60">36</reflink>]).</p> <p>These recommendations are maintained by the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) which are the revised National Science Education Standards (NSES). The former NSES were first supported by American President George H. W. Bush in 1989 and further encouraged by the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), National Science Foundation, the National Education Goals Panel<bold>,</bold> the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the American Chemical Society, the National Science Resources Center, the American Association of Physics Teachers, the Council of State Science Supervisors, the Earth Science Education Coalition, and the National Association of Biology Teachers. In 1996, the standards were released then in 2010, the National Academy of Sciences, Achieve, the AAAS, and NSTA orchestrated the effort to update the NSES. The new NGSS represent the concepts and skills American students should develop and do. <emph>The Framework for K</emph>-<emph>12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas</emph> (National Research Council [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref61">34</reflink>]) described in the NGSS recommended that classroom instruction allow students to plan and carry out investigations and engage in argument using evidence (p. 42).</p> <p>To improve attitudes and alter stereotypical images, NGSS recommended out-of–class activities such as field trips and fieldwork especially for females. Supported by numerous studies, experience in the college classroom as a professor teaching elementary methods and being a sixth to -eighth grade/years science teacher for over 30 years, the researcher thoroughly agrees and recommends that fieldwork be incorporated whenever possible.</p> <p>Because of the lack of cultural diversity observed in the drawings, the investigator also suggests, based on past studies (McCarthy [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref62">28</reflink>]; Barton [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref63">3</reflink>]; Galili and Hazan [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref64">13</reflink>]; Hoots [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref65">16</reflink>]; Sharkawy [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref66">39</reflink>]; Solomon et al. [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref67">41</reflink>]) the NGSS, and personal experience, that science history and biographies be included in the curriculum to stress the humanistic, multi-cultural aspect of scientific discoveries (Backhus and Thompson [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref68">1</reflink>]; Klopfer [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref69">21</reflink>]; Kuhn [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref70">22</reflink>]; Lin and Chen [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref71">24</reflink>]; Matthews and Davies [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref72">27</reflink>]; McDuffie [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref73">29</reflink>]; Thomas and Pedersen [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref74">42</reflink>]; Turkmen [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref75">44</reflink>]). For example, in a study of 120 student science teachers, Demirba ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref76">9</reflink>]) found that the image formed by the student teachers was strongly affected by the life stories of scientists (50.4%) followed by movies (17.4%).</p> <p>Sharkawy's ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref77">39</reflink>]) study involving 11 first graders in the use of stories about scientists from different cultures revealed that including science history helped the students "acquire images of scientists from less dominant socio-cultural backgrounds" (Sharkawy [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref78">39</reflink>], p. 307). Additionally, in <emph>Appendix H: Nature of Science,</emph> the NGSS ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref79">36</reflink>]) specifically recommended the use of examples from science history in the form of case studies of scientists to develop students' understanding of scientific inquiry and the human side of scientists.</p> <p>In closing, the researcher is encouraged by the results of this study. Based on the DAST, DASTT-C and the participants' lists of attributes, it is the researcher's assertion that the teacher candidates in this study, regardless of age, continued to dress scientists in lab coats and glasses, working alone in a laboratory as reported in numerous studies but perceptions of the personality of scientists are realistic and humanistic. Correspondingly, cognitive abilities of scientists continue to be admired and valued.</p> <p>A definite departure from the stereotypical image of scientists and the most encouraging result, was the high percentage of female scientists this study yielded. For education majors, it is imperative that they have a scientifically literate image of scientists and what scientists do. As future classroom teachers, they will have the ability to influence and identify students' uninformed images early on and engender valid perceptions of science and scientists as these girls and boys advance through their science education.</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-20">Appendix A. Draw-a-Science-Teacher-Test Checklist (DASTT-C)</hd> <p>Student's Name ________________________________________________</p> <p>Gender (circle): M/F Age __________ Grade level ________</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. Lab coat (usually but not necessarily white)</item> <p></p> <item> 2. Eyeglasses</item> <p></p> <item> 3. Facial hair (beard, mustache, abnormally long sideburns)</item> <p></p> <item> 4. Symbols of research (scientific instruments, lab equipment of any kind) Types of scientific instruments / equipment.</item> <p></p> <item> 5. Symbols of knowledge (books, filing cabinets, clipboards, pens in pockets, and so on)</item> <p></p> <item> 6. Technology (the "products" of science) Types of technology (televisions, telephones, missiles, computers, and so on)</item> <p></p> <item> 7. Relevant captions (formulae, taxonomic classification, the "eureka!" syndrome)</item> <p></p> <item> 8. Male gender only</item> <p></p> <item> 9. Caucasian only</item> <p></p> <item> 10. Middle-aged or elderly scientist</item> <p></p> <item> 11. Mythic stereotypes (Frankenstein creatures, Jekyll/Hyde figures, etc.)</item> <p></p> <item> 12. Indications of secrecy (signs or warnings that read "Private," "Keep Out," "Do Not Enter," "Go Away," "Top Secret," and so on)</item> <p></p> <item> 13. Scientist working indoors</item> <p></p> <item> 14. Indications of danger</item> </ulist> <p> <emph>Items added by the researcher</emph> </p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 15. Smiles</item> <p></p> <item> 16. Wild hair</item> </ulist> <p>Note: Several images of the same type in a single drawing count as one image (for example, two scientists each with eyeglasses receive only one check, not two).</p> <hd id="AN0109207889-21">Appendix B. Science questionnaire</hd> <p>Please complete the following information. Your name is not required.</p> <p>Please circle the course in which you are enrolled.</p> <p>EDUC 307 EDUC 415 EDUC 484</p> <p>Age__________________ Gender___________________</p> <p>Years during which you attended high school _____________________________</p> <p>Science courses taken in high school</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>Years attending college________________________________</p> <p>Science courses taken in college as of Spring 2012</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>Please explain in general, how these science courses were taught by your instructors. Continue on the back of this questionnaire if needed. (Ex. Lecture, lab, etc.)</p> <p>_______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>_______________________________________________________________________</p> <p>________________________________________________________________________</p> <p>________________________________________________________________________</p> <p>________________________________________________________________________</p> <ref id="AN0109207889-22"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref68" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Backhus, D., and K. Thompson. 2006. "Addressing the Nature of Science in Preservice Science Teacher Preparation Programs: Science Educator Perceptions." Journal of Science Teacher Education 17: 65–81.10.1007/s10972-006-9012-9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref16" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Baker, D., and R. Leary. 1995. "Letting Girls Speak out about Science." Journal of Research in Science Teaching 32 (1): 3–27.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref63" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Barton, A. C. 1998. Feminist Science Education. New York: Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref56" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bleicher, R., and J. Lindgren. 2005. "Success in Science Learning and Preservice Science Teaching Self-efficacy." Journal of Science Teacher Education 16: 205–225.10.1007/s10972-005-4861-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref2" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Blin-Stoyle, R. 1983. "Girls and Physics." Physics Education 18 (5): 225–228.10.1088/0031-9120/18/5/310</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Chambers, D. W. 1983. "Stereotypic Images of the Scientist: The Draw-a-scientist Test." Science & Education 67 (2): 255–265.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref17" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Christidou, V. 2011. "Interest, Attitudes and Images Related to Science: Combining Students' Voices with the Voices of School Science, Teachers, and Popular Science." International Journal of Environmental and Science Education 6 (2): 141–159.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref37" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Creswell, J. W. 1998. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref76" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Demirba, M. 2009. "The Relationships between the Scientist Perception and Scientific Attitudes of Science Teacher Candidates in Turkey: A Case Study." Scientific Research and Essay 4 (6): 565–576.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Elmas, D., B. Demirdogen, and O. Geban. 2011. "Preservice Chemistry Teachers' Images about Science Teaching in Their Future Classrooms." Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (H. U. Journal of Education) 40: 164–175.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Finson, K., J. Beaver, and B. Cramond. 1995. "Development and Field Test of a Checklist for the Draw-a-scientist Test." School Science and Mathematics 95 (4): 195–205.10.1111/ssm.1995.95.issue-4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Finson, K., J. Pedersen, and J. Thomas. 2006. "Comparing Science Teaching Styles to Students' Perceptions of Scientists." School Science & Mathematics 106 (1): 8–15.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Galili, I., and A. Hazan. 2001. "The Effect of a History-based Course in Optics on Students' Views about Science." Science & Education 10 (1–2): 7–32.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gelabert, M. 2014. "A Multidisciplinary Laboratory Course in Color Science." Journal of College Science Teaching 43 (3): 42–47.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hinkle, D., W. Wiersma, and S. Jurs. 1998. Applied Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Houghton Mifflin.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hoots, R. 1999. "Biological Literacy in a Nonreductionist Environment, Putting Life Back into Biology." The American Biology Teacher 61 (3): 192–200.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jeanpierre, B. 2014. "Inquiry in the Urban Science Classroom: Connecting Curiosity and Creativity." NSTA Reports 25 (5): 3.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jones, R., and A. Bangert. 2006. "The 'CSI' Effect: Changing the Face of Science." Science Scope 30 (3): 38–42.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jones, M. G., A. Howe, and M. J. Rua. 2000. "Gender Differences in Student Experiences, Interests and Attitudes." Science & Education 84 (2): 180–192.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Joyce, B., and S. Farenga. 1999. "Informal Science Experience, Attitudes, Future Interest in Science, and Gender of High-ability Students: An Exploratory Study." School Science and Mathematics 99 (8), 431–437.10.1111/ssm.1999.99.issue-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Klopfer, L. 1969. "The Teaching of Science and the History of Science." Journal of Research in Science Teaching 6 (1): 87–95.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Landis, J. R., and G. G. Koch. 1977. "The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data." Biometrics 33: 159–174.10.2307/2529310</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lin, H., and C. Chen. 2002. "Promoting Preservice Chemistry Teachers' Understanding about the Nature of Science through History." Journal of Research in Science Teaching 39 (9): 773–792.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lotter, C. 2004. "Preservice Science Teachers' Concerns through Classroom Observations and Student Teaching: Special Focus on Inquiry Teaching." Science Educator 13 (1): 29–38.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Martin, D. 2012. Elementary Science Methods: A Constructivist Approach. Wadsworth: Cenage Learning.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Matthews, B., and D. Davies. 1999. "Changing Children's Images of Scientists: Can Teachers make a Difference?" School Science Review 80 (293): 79–85.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McCarthy, D. 2002. "The Influence of the Integration of a Science History Unit Addressing the Affective Domain with the Typical Physical Science Curriculum on the Attitudes toward Science of High School Females." Doctoral diss., University of New Orleans.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McDuffie, T. E. 2001. "Scientists – Geeks and Nerds?" Science and Children 38 (8): 16–19.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meade, M., and R. Metraux. 1957. "Image of the Scientist among High-school Students a Pilot Study." Science 126 (3270): 384–390.10.1126/science.126.3270.384</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miele, E. 2014. "Using the Draw-a-scientist Test for Inquiry and Evaluation." Journal of College Science Teaching 43 (4): 36–40.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Narayan, R., S. Park, and D. Peker. 2009. EpiSTEME 3: Proceedings from the 3rd International Conference to Review Research on Science, Technology and Mathematics Education. Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education, TIFR: Mumbai, India.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Narayan, R., S. Park, D. Peker, and J. Suh. 2013. "Students' Images of Scientists and Doing Science: An International Comparison Study." Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education 9 (2): 115–129.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Research Council. 2012. 10 Implementation: Curriculum, Instruction, Teacher Development, and Assessment. a Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> NGSS (Next Generation Science Standards). 2013. Appendix H – Understanding the Scientific Enterprise: The Nature of Science in the Next Generation Science Standards. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/ngss/files/Appendix%20H%20-%20The%20Nature%20of%20Science%20in%20the%20Next%20Generation%20Science%20Standards%204.15.13.pdf">http://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/ngss/files/Appendix%20H%20-%20The%20Nature%20of%20Science%20in%20the%20Next%20Generation%20Science%20Standards%204.15.13.pdf</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> NGSS Lead States. 2013. Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. <ulink href="http://www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards">www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ozel, A. 2012. "Children's Images of Scientists: Does Grade Level Make a Difference?" Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 12 (4-Special Issue): 3187–3198.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Potter, E., and S. Rosser. 1992. "Factors in Life Science Textbooks That May Deter Girls' Interest in Science." Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29 (7): 669–686.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sharkawy, A. 2012. "Exploring the Potential of Using Stories about Diverse Scientists and Reflective Activities to Enrich Primary Students' Images of Scientists and Scientific Work." Cultural Studies of Science Education 7: 307–340.10.1007/s11422-012-9386-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smolleck, L., and A. Mongan. 2011. "Changes in Preservice Teachers' Self-efficacy: From Science Methods to Student Teaching." Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology 1 (11): 33–145.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Solomon, J., J. Duveen, L. Scot, and S. McCarthy. 1992. "Teaching about the Nature of Science through History: Action Research in the Classroom." Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29 (4): 409–421.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thomas, J., and J. Pedersen. 2003. "Reforming Elementary Science Teacher Preparation: What about Extant Teaching Beliefs?" School Science & Mathematics 103 (7): 319–330.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thomas, J., J. Pedersen, and K. Finson. 2001. "Validating the Draw-a-science-teacher-test Checklist (DASTT-C): Exploring Mental Models and Teacher Beliefs." Journal of Science Teacher Education 12 (4): 295–310.10.1023/A:1014216328867</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Turkmen, H. 2008. "Turkish Primary Students' Perceptions about Scientists and What Factors Affecting the Image of the Scientists." Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education 4 (1): 55–61.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Viera, A., and J. Garrett. 2005. "Understanding Interobserver Agreement: The Kappa Statistic." Family Medicine 37 (5): 360–363.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wallace, E., and J. Pedersen. 2005. "Evaluative Case Study of a Summer Academy Program." Electronic Journal of Science Education 9 (4).</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Deborah McCarthy</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref71"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1073289
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Teacher Candidates' Perceptions of Scientists: Images and Attributes
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McCarthy%2C+Deborah%22">McCarthy, Deborah</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Educational+Review%22"><i>Educational Review</i></searchLink>. 2015 67(4):389-413.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 25
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2015
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research<br />Tests/Questionnaires
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preservice+Teachers%22">Preservice Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Teacher+Attitudes%22">Student Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scientists%22">Scientists</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scientific+Attitudes%22">Scientific Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Stereotypes%22">Stereotypes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attribution+Theory%22">Attribution Theory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Affective+Measures%22">Affective Measures</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Freehand+Drawing%22">Freehand Drawing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Check+Lists%22">Check Lists</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gender+Differences%22">Gender Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comparative+Analysis%22">Comparative Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Methods+Courses%22">Methods Courses</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Methods+Teachers%22">Methods Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Education+Majors%22">Education Majors</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Statistical+Analysis%22">Statistical Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+Methodology%22">Research Methodology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Questionnaires%22">Questionnaires</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Correlation%22">Correlation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interrater+Reliability%22">Interrater Reliability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Physical+Characteristics%22">Physical Characteristics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Work+Environment%22">Work Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Ability%22">Cognitive Ability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Personality+Traits%22">Personality Traits</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Louisiana%22">Louisiana</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/00131911.2014.974510
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0013-1911
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The masculine image of scientists as elderly men wearing white coats and glasses, working alone in the laboratory has been documented since the 1950s. Because it is important that teacher candidates have a scientifically literate image of scientists due to the impact they have on their future students, this investigation is salient. This study involved the examination of drawings of scientists using the Draw-a-Scientist Test (DAST) and Draw-a-Science-Teacher-Test Checklist (DASTT-C) coupled with attributes listed by 91 teacher candidates enrolled in elementary education courses at an American university in south Louisiana. The purpose of this study was two-fold, first to investigate teacher candidates' images of scientists and second, to determine associated characteristics. Reasons for images, demographic information and facts concerning science courses were collected as contributing data. Images drawn by teacher candidates in a planning and assessment course were compared to those drawn by elementary methods students. Atypical drawings and those by male participants were analyzed separately. The overall results were encouraging. Certain items associated with the stereotypical image of scientists appeared in the 91 drawings while others were slightly represented or totally absent. Female scientists appeared in almost 48% of the drawings and smiling scientists were common. Some differences in percentages of items occurred between methods and planning/assessment teacher candidates. Various attributes were stereotypical but there were many exceptions. Some influencers identified by participants were electronic and print media, high school classes and college laboratories. Recommendations were the inclusion of science history and out-of-classroom experiences in methods courses.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 46
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2015
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1073289
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1073289
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/00131911.2014.974510
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 25
        StartPage: 389
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Preservice Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Teacher Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scientists
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scientific Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Stereotypes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Attribution Theory
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Affective Measures
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Freehand Drawing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Check Lists
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gender Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comparative Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Methods Courses
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Methods Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Education Majors
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Statistical Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research Methodology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Questionnaires
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Correlation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interrater Reliability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Physical Characteristics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Work Environment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cognitive Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Personality Traits
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Louisiana
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Teacher Candidates' Perceptions of Scientists: Images and Attributes
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McCarthy, Deborah
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2015
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0013-1911
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 67
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Educational Review
              Type: main
ResultId 1