Preparing Science Teachers in an Era of Reform: Practitioners? Perspectives of Methods Courses William J. Letts IV University of Delaware Bambi L. Bailey University of Delaware Kathryn Scantlebury University of Delaware With recent national calls for the reform of science education have come standards that delineate not only science content but also assessment, pedagogy, and teachers’professional development. If teachers must teach science differently, then teacher preparation must change. This study asked 31 inservice secondary science teachers to complete a survey about topics for inclusion in a secondary science methods course. Respondents ranked a list of prespecified topics and had an opportunity to suggest other topics for inclusion in the course. Results showed that the majority of prespecified potential topics were judged important enough by these teachers to warrant inclusion in a methods course, though no individual added topic appeared on more than two surveys. Results demonstrate that these teachers believe teaching many of the traditional topics in science methods courses is still needed. In addition, they advocated the inclusion of several topics that either represent recent technological and theoretical advances, or long- standing ideas that have recently received considerable attention. Recent national science education reform efforts to renew and improve science education recognize that changes must occur in pedagogy as well as science curriculum. These efforts are attempting to change science teaching and learning in our nation’s class- rooms. The National Science Education Standards have issued a "call to action" to further the goal of scientific literacy for all students (National Research Council [NRC], 1996). These standards envision an educational system "...in which all students demon- strate high levels of performance, in which teachers are empowered to make the decisions essential for effec- tive learning, ...and in which supportive educational programs and systems nurture achievement" (p. 2). Likewise, Project 2061’’s Benchmarks for Science Lit- eracy proposes "... what students should know and be able to do in science, mathematics, and technology by the time they graduate from high school" (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1993, p. xi). The NRC stated that the secondary science curriculum should present science as a process (NRC, 1990, 1996), and AAAS’s Benchmarks/or Science Literacy echoed this sentiment (AAAS, 1993). These documents also seek to identify a common core of learning in science, mathematics, and technology to reach the goal of scientific literacy for all. Concurrent with these reform efforts, conceptual shifts regarding the definition of good teaching and meaningful learning, the utilization of technology in science classrooms, theories about cognition, an ex- amination of classroom contextual factors such as ethnicity and gender, and the role played by history and philosophy of science are occurring within the science education community. In science education the para- digm has shifted away from the transmission of care- fully operationalized, hierarchical, behavioral objectives toward the facilitation of learning through construedvist practices. Reflecting these conceptual shifts, Schon (1987) describes the type of teachers needed in today’s schools as "reflective practitioners" rather than "technical experts." Therefore, traditional methods course topics may no longer adequately pre- pare preservice teachers to face the challenge of teach- ing in an era of reform. Using the example of laboratory activities in teaching science, the emphasis has changed from "cookbook" laboratories to inquiry experiences (NRC, 1996; Rutherford & Ahlgren, 1990). However, many preservice teachers do not under- stand how to teach science as a process because they learned science dogmatically as a collection of facts (Brickhouse & Letts, in press). The old teaching para- digm relied heavily on lecture because it is considered the most efficient method of transmitting facts. .The new paradigm requires preparation and facilitation of lessons that, to a greater extent, allow students to define their knowledge based on relevant experiences. Wide variation exists in teachers’ instructional strategies based upon these conflicting paradigms. The redesign of secondary science methods courses must be respon- sive to the different teaching paradigms that currently exist in high school science teaching, as well as the new paradigm promulgated by the reform effort. Therefore, teacher educators must attempt to discover which topics are still necessary and which are potentially no School Science and Mathematics