Daniel M. Alston, Jeff. C. Marshall, and V.

Serbay Zambak

Inquiry Instructional Practice in

Middle School Science Classes:
Applying Vroom’s Valence-
Instrumentality-Expectancy
Theory of Motivation
Since the late 1950’s, science education process throughout by approaches such as teachers’ instructional behaviors can
in the United States has undergone many predict, observe, and explain, as opposed result in improved efforts by research-
educational reform movements—most to sit and observe, which places students ers to align their instruction with quality
achieving less than ideal results on stu- in a more passive role not supported by inquiry-based instruction. By improving
dent performance (Atkin & Black, 2007). NGSS. The expectations stated in the the effectiveness of PD programs, we
Currently, the National Research Coun- NGSS encourage teachers to redesign ed- can begin to decrease the disconnect be-
cil (NRC) is leading science education’s ucational experiences so students deeply tween current teaching practice and the
newest reform effort, with A Framework and meaningfully think about the sci- expectations stated in the NGSS.
for K-12 Science Education (NRC, 2012) ence concepts they are learning (Achieve, This study seeks to determine whether
and the Next Generation Science Stan- 2013). Further, these educational experi- Vroom’s Valence-Instrumentality-Expec-
dards (NGSS) (Achieve, 2013). These ences should encourage students to apply, tancy (VIE) Theory of Motivation can
documents outline a radical shift in what analyze, and create—all actions aligned help explain science teachers’ enact-
students are expected to achieve and thus with NGSS expectations. It is important, ment of newly learned inquiry-based
how teachers will have to teach. Inquiry- therefore, that educational stakeholders teaching practices. Specifically, the pur-
based instruction now becomes an es- design professional development (PD) pose of this study is to determine if
sential strategy to help students model, that assists teachers in using instructional Vroom’s theory provides insight into
design, plan, and analyze scientific ex- strategies that will enable all students to teacher practice of inquiry instruction by
periences as outlined by the performance succeed relative to the goals set forth by examining teachers’ ability beliefs, value
expectations detailed in NGSS. However, the NGSS (Cooper, 2013). of inquiry instruction, and instrumental-
there seems to be a disconnect between Success of PD that is designed to ity beliefs. Additionally, we were also in-
the performance expectations from NGSS develop science teachers’ inquiry prac- terested to see if teachers’ knowledge of
(i.e., student-centered instruction which tices can be affected by teachers’ atti- inquiry instruction could be an important
encourages higher-order thinking) and tudes (Glassman & Albarracin, 2006), factor. The research questions for this
the teacher-centered instructional strate- knowledge and beliefs (Gess-Newsome, study include: (a) which constructs with-
gies currently utilized by many science 1999), and differing definitions and per- in Vroom’s VIE Theory of Motivation
teachers (Marshall, Horton, Igo, & Switzer ceptions of inquiry instruction (Barrow, are related to teachers enacting quality
2009; Capps & Crawford, 2013). It is no 2006). Each of these factors’ relation- inquiry-based instruction, and (b) how
longer appropriate for teachers to solely ships with inquiry-based instruction and to what extent can teachers’ knowl-
use lecture or direct instruction where helps provide a lens to better understand edge of inquiry instruction help explain
students are only asked to memorize in- what causes teachers to engage in cer- teachers’ enactment of inquiry?
formation to be recalled for a quiz or test tain teaching practices. Motivation is a
at a later date. This approach lacks engag- term used to describe “the forces acting Theoretical Framework and
ing students in the scientific practices— on or within an organism to initiate or Literature Review
the doing of science. Further, strategies direct behavior” (Petri & Govern, 2004, Inquiry-based instruction has a long
such as demonstrations can be beneficial p. 16). Therefore one could argue that history in science reform documents
if students are engaged in the learning attitudes, knowledge, beliefs, and dif- (Anderson, 2007). During this history,
fering definitions and perceptions can inquiry instruction has suffered from
all affect science teachers’ motivation differing conceptions of what it means
Keywords: Inquiry-based instruction, to engage in inquiry practices. Better to engage in inquiry teaching and learn-
Motivation, Teacher beliefs
understanding what motivates science ing. Authors of contemporary reform

SUMMER 2017 VOL. 26, NO. 1 1

documents have attempted to clarify the and having access to long-term support achieving a certain task regardless of the
meaning of inquiry instruction so that (Loucks-Horsley, Stiles, Mundry, Love, barriers that stand in the way (Bandura,
stakeholders in science education have & Hewson, 2010). Research also indi- 1997). In a study designed to research
a common view of inquiry and thus be- cates that the combination of multiday the impact of four leadership tenants,
come better able to collectively influence workshops and continuous monitoring including the motivation of teachers,
science teaching (Achieve, 2013; NRC, can significantly impact teacher instruc- Thoonen et al. (2011) found self-efficacy
2012; Osborne, 2014). tional practices (Sunal, et al., 2001). to be a crucial motivational factor re-
Though The Framework and the NGSS Despite the goal of science education garding teacher learning and teaching
do not explicitly use the term inquiry, it reforms and PD programs to encourage practices. Furthermore, Czerniak (1990)
is clearly present within the new scien- inquiry-based teaching (Achieve, 2013; found that highly efficacious teachers
tific practices (Achieve, 2013; NRC, American Association for Advancement were more likely to engage in inquiry in-
2012). These scientific practices closely of Science [AAAS], 2003; NRC, 1996), struction and instruction that was student-
resemble the components of inquiry laid teachers continue to struggle with its centered.
out in the National Science Education implementation (Capps & Crawford, Outcome expectancy is the belief that
Standards (NSES) (NRC, 1996); how- 2013). One reason for this struggle is “a teacher can make a difference to a
ever, the authors stress that these prac- that teachers find it difficult to enact child’s academic performance” (Desouza,
tices are geared towards getting students (Sunal & Wright, 2006). Researchers have Boone, & Yilmaz, 2004, p. 840). Another
to deeply understand and engage in the also found that teachers’ insufficient term for this is instrumentality belief.
work that scientists do to make sense of belief, values, and knowledge regarding Instrumentality belief is the belief that
and validate scientific knowledge (NRC, inquriy instruction dissaude implementa- one’s performance can have a positive
2012; Osborne, 2014). Furthermore, an tion of inquiry-based teaching (Crawford, impact (Vroom, 1964). In their study
advancement of NGSS is that it embeds 2007; Lotter, Harwood, & Bonner, 2006). designed to identify the motivating fac-
the scientific practices within the core Further, Grigg, Kelly, Gamoran, and tors which led teachers to engage in the
ideas and crosscutting concepts, instead Borman (2013) found that teachers mainly Ohio Competency Based Science Model,
of the implied integration found in the enacted inquiry if the behavior was Haney, Czerniak, and Lumpe (1996)
NSES. So, NGSS reinforces that scientific explicitly modeled during the PD. This found that attitude toward the behaivor
knowledge cannot be separated from the indicates that experience with inquiry (i.e., instrumentality beliefs) was found
process of science. teaching (i.e., knowledge of what inquiry to be the most signigicant contributor
While the current PD program be- instruction looks like) can play a role in toward behavioral intention. Moreover,
gan during the time of the NSES, our teachers enacting inquiry-based teaching Bandura (1977) argues that it is a com-
concept of inquiry continues to closely strategies. Given the barriers that can im- bination of high efficacy and outcome
align with views expressed in the NGSS. pede science teachers from engaging in expectancy beliefs that enable indi-
Specifically, our PD was designed to en- inquiry-based instruction, it is important viduals to engage and persist in certain
couraged teachers to get their students that we seek to understand factors that behaviors.
asking questions, planning and carrying influence teacher behavior. While there Values also play a role in impacting
out investigations, analyzing and inter- are many factors which impact teacher teachers’ motivation to enact a given
preting data, constructing explanations, behavior, researchers have illustrated the instructional practice. Anderson (1996)
engaging in argument from evidence, importance of motivation on teacher in- details three dimensions that are in-
and gathering, critiquing, and presenting structional practice. volved in teachers being able to change
information. The goal of encouraging their practice: (a) technical (e.g., teacher
teachers to get their students engaging Motivational Factors and Teacher pedagogical and content knowledge),
in these activities was to encourage stu- Practice (b) political (e.g., lack of support), and
dents to construct their own knowledge Motivation is a complex process fo- (c) cultural (e.g., teacher beliefs and
of science concepts and come to a deeper cused on any specified behavior (Ciani, values regarding teaching practices) of
understanding regarding “what scientists Summers, & Easter, 2008; Czubaj, 1996; which he attributes the most important to
have to do to establish reliable knowl- Pop, Dixon, & Grove, 2010). Motivation be the cultural dimension. Further, in their
edge” (Osborne, 2014, p. 180). can be affected by many factors such as; study designed to analyze high school
Since teachers frequently struggle to a person’s context (Ciani et al., 2008), teacher motivation, Ciani et al. (2008)
implement inquiry instruction, PD pro- beliefs (Czubaj, 1996), feelings, and val- found that the value that a teacher places
grams are often developed to assist teach- ues (Thoonen, Sleegers, Oort, Peetsma, on certain practices is crucial in deter-
ers in improving their inquiry-based & Geijsel, 2011). mining if he or she persists in continuing
instructional strategies. PD characterisitcs It has long been accepted that self- to try that specified practice.
that effectively change teacher practice efficacy beliefs are critical in predicting Since self-efficacy, instrumentality be-
include: actively engaging participants, teacher behavior (Bandura, 1997). Self- liefs, and values are important factors
having highly qualified PD facilitators, efficacy is an individual’s confidence in in how teachers teach, it is crucial that

2 SCIENCE EDUCATOR
we determine the relationship between & Plano Clark, 2011). The embedded allowing them to: (a) engage and explore
these factors and teacher enactment of design allows for more efficient data col- in inquiry as a student and teacher,
inquiry-based instruction. Vroom’s VIE lection as well as the ability to examine (b) explain inquiry instruction with facili-
Theory of Motivation provides a frame- changes in teachers before and after the tation from the developers, and (c) extend
work with which to investigate the rela- intervention. The convergent design allows on their knowledge of inquiry instruction
tionship between these three motivational for the analysis to: (a) examine relation- by collectively creating lessons which uti-
factors and behavior. ships among VIE variables and teacher lized the 4Ex2 framework.
practice (quantitative) and (b) explore The program provided teachers with
Vroom’s VIE Theory of Motivation whether teachers’ knowledge of inquiry two weeks of summer training, four group
The theoretical framework we will can help to explain the relationships follow-up sessions during the academic
be using in this study is Vroom’s VIE found between the VIE components and year, four or more full class observations
Theory of Motivation. Vroom’s VIE teachers’ inquiry-based practices (quali- with debriefing afterwards, and numerous
Theory focuses on explaining individu-
tative). The context of this study, instru- individual support sessions. The sum-
als’ motivation towards engaging in mentation, data collection, and analysis mer PD involved modeling examples of
certain behaviors using three interactive of data are described in more detail in inquiry-based instruction, debriefing mod-
components: (a) value, (b) instrumental- the following sections. eled examples, and developing new inquiry-
ity beliefs, and (c) expectancy beliefs based lessons in teams. Support during
(Vroom, 1964). He proposed that a high Context and Participants the academic year included co-planning,
degree of each regarding a certain be- This study tracks five years of a PD co-teaching, observations, and debrief-
havior would lead to an increase in that program that sought to increase the qual- ing observed classroom instruction.
specified behavior. ity and quantity of middle school science Each year participating teachers came
Valence (i.e., value), according to Van teachers’ inquiry-based instruction. The from one of the 2-3 partnering schools.
Eerde and Thierry (1996), is “the im- PD was designed based on the 4Ex2 In- This study only analyzes data for first year
portance, attractiveness, desirability, or structional Model (see Marshall, Horton, participants, and of the 57 first year science
anticipated satisfaction with outcomes” Smart, 2009 for a detailed explanation of teacher participants, only 36 are included
(p. 576). Instrumentality can be defined the 4Ex2 Instructional Model). Utilizing in this analysis because data was incom-
as “the perceived probability that good this model, the PD purposed to develop plete for the others. Teaching experience
performance will lead to desired out- teachers’ ability to enact quality inquiry- of participants spanned from 0 to 35 years
comes” (Chiang & Jang, 2008, p. 314). based instruction in their classrooms by (M=12.9, SD=10.4) with 67% having
Said another way, instrumentality is the
belief that a person will be rewarded
if an expected behavior is shown. In
this context, the expected behavior is
inquiry-based instruction. Therefore,
teachers should believe that they will
see increased achievement and student
engagement in their classroom due to
using inquiry-based instruction. Vroom
(1964) defined expectancy beliefs as the
probability that effort will lead to certain
performance. Ability beliefs are differ-
ent from expectancy beliefs in that they
measure how competent an individual
feels about performing a behavior. Since
the current study assesses an individual’s
ability beliefs rather than their expectancy
beliefs, the expectancy referred to in this
study aligns with Bandura’s (1997) abil-
ity beliefs.

Methods
This study utilizes an embedded
mixed method design (Figure 1) for data
collection and a convergent mixed method
design (Figure 2) for the analysis (Creswell Figure 1. Embedded design data collection method.

SUMMER 2017 VOL. 26, NO. 1 3

 B was completed in an effort to group
the questions into separate components
(expectancy, valence, and instrumental-
ity) for analysis. Then, a dependent t-test
was conducted to make statistical infer-
ences based on the transformation of
teacher beliefs and values. Following the
analysis of Survey B, a dependent t-test
was performed on the EQUIP data (n = 25
teachers) to determine if the interven-
tion resulted in teachers changing their
quality of inquiry instruction. While 36
teachers were included in this study,
only 25 of them had pre-intervention
EQUIP scores. Specifically, some of the
teachers were new hires or not available
during the spring prior to the interven-
tion. To ensure that this sub-set of teach-
ers is representative of the whole group,
a dependent t-test was performed to de-
termine if a significant difference existed
for the beliefs and values scores for the
two groups. Finally, a bivariate correla-
Figure 2. Convergent design data analysis method. tion analysis was performed to deter-
mine if there were relationships between
earned a master’s degree or higher. Fifty Survey A: Knowledge and percep- the belief and value components found
percent taught sixth grade, 30% taught sev- tions of inquiry. This open response in Survey B and the inquiry-based in-
enth grade, and 20% taught eighth grade. survey allows teachers to define and de- struction being enacted by the teachers.
scribe inquiry-based instruction, as well Qualitative data. In order to answer
Instrumentation as, provide feedback about what they our second research question, we assessed
The following data sources were in- perceive to be the advantages and disad- our participants’ knowledge of inquiry
cluded to address the research questions: vantages of inquiry instruction. with pre-Survey A which asked them to
(a) Electronic Quality of Inquiry Proto- Survey B: Beliefs and values. This define inquiry instruction. This allowed
col (EQUIP), (b) Survey A: Knowledge survey uses a Likert-scale (one being us to find out if and how the knowledge
and Perceptions of Inquiry Survey, and “Disagree Completely” and six being of inquiry held by teachers helped explain
(c) Survey B: Beliefs and Values Survey. the relationships found between the VIE
“Agree Completely”) to assess teacher
Each of these data sources are detailed in beliefs and values toward inquiry-based components and teacher practice. In do-
this section. instruction. This survey also collected ing this, we sought to determine whether
EQUIP. This observation protocol was the general teacher demographic data. The Vroom’s VIE theory should be modified
designed to measure four constructs of in- internal consistency value (Cronbach’s to include aspects of knowledge regard-
quiry instruction: assessment, instruction, Alpha) was .75 for this survey. ing the choice behavior.
discourse, and curriculum (see https:// Participants’ pre-definition of inquiry
tinyurl.com/y7ud5h2l for a detailed de- Data Collection and Analysis was analyzed using a process of open
scription of the EQUIP instrument ). Each Quantitative data. Data for partici- and emergent coding (Strauss & Corbin,
teacher was formally observed using the pants were gathered over a 12 month 1998). To begin this process, the partici-
EQUIP at least four times (typically once period. EQUIP data were collected by pants’ responses were de-identified and
each nine weeks) during the year they trained reviewers who met a high inter- assigned a pseudonym. Two of the au-
were involved in the program. After each rater reliability threshold before starting. thors independently coded and discussed
observation, teachers were scored on each Survey data were all collected via online a subset of the participants’ definitions
of the four aspects of inquiry measured, as methods during face-to-face meetings. of inquiry and established an initial clas-
well as given an overall lesson score. The Figure 2 provides a flowchart illustrat- sification system of codes. Each defini-
EQUIP has been found to be highly valid ing the analysis process. Using the Sta- tion was first separated into individual
and reliable (Marshall, Smart, Horton, tistical Package for the Social Sciences units, each of which was independently
2010) with a Chronbach’s Alpha of 0.912 (SPSS), a principal components analysis assigned a code. These initial codes
(N = 102). of the 25 survey questions from Survey were informed by our own conceptions

4 SCIENCE EDUCATOR
of inquiry as well as the definition of Table 1. Principal Component Analysis and Amount of Error Variance
inquiry presented by NGSS (Achieve, Components Factor Labels Percentage of Variance
2013) and NSES (NRC, 1996). Through 1 STEM Education Emphasis 15.091
a discussion of the author’s individual
2* Instruction Beliefs 27.131
coding schemes, a shared set of codes
3* Motivation 35.191
and meanings was developed. Using
4* Support Beliefs 42.495
this set of codes, the same authors then
independently coded the definitions for 5 Knowledge about Content Standards 49.205
all 36 participants. Upon compiling the 6 Knowledge about Process Standards 55.501
codes, we identified which codes could 7 Searching for Different Resources 61.609
be grouped in order to decrease redun- 8* The Importance of Inquiry 67.035
dancy (Glaser & Strauss 1967). This Note. * Denote components used in the current study.
process was repeated until we were able
to come up with a set of themes. Further-
more, since we were looking at the quan- The Motivation component represents Significant differences were not found
titative data as a whole, we purposefully instrumentality since more engaging in relevant characteristics (i.e., belief
grouped the qualitative data accordingly. and motivating instruction can lead to and value scores) between the group of
We felt this would provide qualitative higher student achievement (Fredricks, 25 teachers and the group of 36 teachers.
and quantitative data that would better Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004; Klem & Thus, we felt confident in generalizing
enable us to understand this group of Connell, 2004; Reyes, Brackett, Rivers, to the larger group that similar growth
teachers. White, & Salovey, 2012). The items in in inquiry instruction from pre- to post-
this component involve teachers’ beliefs intervention would have been expected.
that inquiry instruction increased students’
Findings Relationship of VIE Constructs and
engagement and excitement (e.g., Using
Teacher Practice
Components in Survey B inquiry teaching methods increases most
Pre-belief had a significant positive
Principal Components Analysis (PCA) students’ enjoyment of science; Inquiry
correlation with pre-instrumentality,
with a varimax rotation was performed teaching methods motivate students who
r(36)=.435, p<.01 as did belief change
to determine the number and nature of would otherwise be disengaged). Finally,
and instrumentality change, r(36)=.372,
the components present in Survey B. The Importance of Inquiry represents teach-
p<.05. No significant relationship was
PCA was run without setting a specific ers’ value of inquiry instruction or the
found between expectancy and va-
number of components and resulted in valence (e.g., Teaching content is more
lence, but the relationship between pre-
eight components being retained due important than teaching inquiry). Teach-
instrumentality and pre-valence was
to interpretability and these components ers had significant increases in their mo-
significant, r(36)=.422, p<.05. The in-
having eigenvalues greater than one tivation beliefs after a year of PD (p<.05)
struction construct of teacher inquiry
(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2012). Eight com- but not their valence scores.
practice was positively correlated with
ponents were identified from the survey Teacher Practice science teachers’ pre-instruction ability
(See Table 1), but only the four pertain- Teachers’ growth in implementing beliefs (sub-component of expectancy),
ing to teacher valence, expectancy, and inquiry instruction was measured with r(36)=.363, p<.05. It was also found
instrumentality were included. a dependent t-test comparing teachers that the assessment construct of teacher
Instruction Beliefs focused on whether pre- and post- EQUIP scores. After one inquiry practice was positively correlated
teachers believed they were effective at year of the intervention, teachers signifi- with teachers’ pre-instruction ability
leading an inquiry-based classroom (e.g., cantly grew in their ability to implement beliefs, r(36)=.365, p<.05. There were
During inquiry, I can manage student be- better quality inquiry instruction in all no other motivational factors found to be
havior; I can effectively lead students in constructs of the EQUIP, as well as the significantly related to teachers’ inquiry
inquiry). The category of Support Beliefs lesson total (see Table 2). instruction.
was comprised of items related to teach-
ers’ beliefs about the support they had to Table 2. Pre vs. Post EQUIP Scores (N=25)
incorporate inquiry instruction at their Pre Post
school (e.g., My school’s administration Construct M SD M SD p
is supportive of inquiry instruction). Col-
Instruction 2.10 0.75 2.58 0.46 .010
lectively, these two components were com-
Discourse 1.70 0.68 2.31 0.43 <.001
bined to represent expectancy. Teachers
Curriculum 1.84 0.70 2.31 0.31 .004
were found to have significantly increased
in their instruction beliefs after a year of Assessment 1.76 0.60 2.38 0.49 <.001
PD (p<.05) but not their support beliefs. Lesson Total 1.70 0.61 2.39 0.46 <.001

SUMMER 2017 VOL. 26, NO. 1 5

Qualitative Results representative definition that described knowledge, and ongoing assessment and
The authors’ independent coding of inquiry instruction as being teacher fa- only occurred in 9% of teachers’ defini-
the 36 pre-responses revealed 190 units cilitated is, “Students learn by investigat- tions. The following definition provides
within the definitions, 87.9% of which ing a concept on their own with guidance a representative example of the teachers’
were agreed upon in the initial coding. and questioning from a teacher, rather definitions of inquiry instruction that in-
All cases of disagreement were dis- than having a teacher tell the students cludes the current theme: “Students are
cussed until consensus was reached. what they should be learning from the asked to solve and identify problems based
Codes were then collapsed further and beginning through lecture (Belinda, sur- on previous knowledge and experiences,
verified between authors (Glaser & vey response, July 16, 2012).” inferences, observations, and evidence
Strauss, 1967). This resulted in 26 codes Theme 3: Students are responsible they have collected. The teacher acts as
being retained. From these 26 codes, five for their learning. This theme had some a facilitator to guide the students as they
themes emerged (Saldana, 2009). Utiliz- overlap with the previous theme and was are solving the problem (Cristy, survey re-
ing these themes, we were able to look seen in 26% of teachers’ definitions. It sponse, July 19, 2010).”
at pre definitions of inquiry provided embodied teachers’ definitions of inquiry Relationship between knowledge
by the teachers to determine if and how which used phrases such as, students and teacher practice. It is illustrated
their conception (i.e., knowledge) of in- explain; students construct their under- through the emergent themes that teach-
quiry instruction could help explain the standing; and students are responsible ers explicitly defined inquiry in terms of
relationship between their practice and for their learning. Included in this theme the student and teacher roles, order of in-
beliefs regarding inquiry instruction. were also the scientific practices that stu- struction, and instructional strategies de-
Theme 1: Student exploration. Thirty- dents utilized to take ownership of their signed to engage students. Teachers also
seven percent of teachers’ definitions learning (e.g., observing, analyzing). explicitly cited the importance of assess-
contained this theme. Teachers described The following quote from one of the ment in their definition of inquiry instruc-
student exploration in terms of having teachers provides an example of a typi- tion. Specifically, the teachers mentioned
students take part in labs and hands-on cal definition which includes this theme. the need to assess and use students’ prior
activities designed to get students to Inquiry based instruction is al- knowledge, as well as teacher questions
think like scientists. Teachers also used lowing the students to explore and to facilitate in-class instruction. Figure
descriptors that had the underlying idea come up with their own understand- 3 illustrates how the emergent themes
that students were provided an oppor- ing of how things work in the world correspond to the instruction and assess-
tunity to look into concepts before they around them. It is student driven ment constructs from EQUIP (see https://
learned about them from the teacher. An and the teacher is more of a facilita- tinyurl.com/y7ud5h2l). These were the
example of this is seen in the follow- tor that guides them (Leslie, survey two EQUIP constructs found to be sig-
ing definition provided by one of the response, July 20, 2009). nificantly correlated to pre-instructional
teachers: beliefs (i.e., expectancy beliefs). While
Inquiry-based instruction involves Theme 4: Students engaged in learn- the ideas of discourse and curriculum (the
student centered learning. The stu- ing. This theme included the idea that other two EQUIP constructs) are seen in
dents are investigating, observing, and students should somehow be engaged teachers’ pre-definitions of inquiry in-
doing more hands-on lessons as well in learning during inquiry instruction. struction, teachers did not mention these
as recording what they are seeing, Eleven percent of teachers’ definitions aspects as often in their definitions.
doing, and predicting. The students included this theme. Definitions referred Interestingly, teachers’ pre-instructional
are driven to think like real scientists to this engagement in learning as pur- beliefs were not found to be significantly
think as opposed to just reading a text- posefully designed by the teacher. An correlated with practices related to dis-
book and taking notes (Claire, survey example of this is shown in the following course or curriculum.
response, July 16, 2012). definition: “Inquiry-based instruction in-
volves drawing the students in when you Discussion and Implications
Theme 2: Teacher acts as a facilita- allow them to engage in a thought pro- This study considered whether Vroom’s
tor. Seventeen percent of teachers’ defi- cess or activity that creates an interest, VIE Theory of Motivation could explain
nitions included this theme. This theme a desire, and a need for understanding a science teachers’ implementation of in-
embodied the aspects of inquiry instruc- concept (Amanda, survey response, July quiry-based instruction and how teach-
tion that see learning as being student 16, 2012).” ers’ knowledge about inquiry instruction
centered. Teachers considered a class to Theme 5: Students’ prior knowledge could help explain their teaching practice.
be student-centered if the teacher acted is utilized. This theme contains the aspects Vroom’s theory states that an individual’s
as a facilitator who clarified explana- of inquiry concerning the assessment of choice to implement certain behaviors is
tions through questioning and discus- student knowledge in order to utilize it dependent on three motivational compo-
sion instead of a direct instructor who in the instruction. This theme contained nents: valence, instrumentality, and ex-
was simply providing explanations. A the phrases of teacher questions, prior pectancy (Vroom, 1964). Additionally,

6 SCIENCE EDUCATOR
 are critical factors in determining teach-
er practice. Our results indicate that our
teachers’ knowledge of inquiry instruc-
tion and inquiry assessment increased
their ability beliefs regarding these two
factors in inquiry and therefore enabled
them to exhibit these inquiry behaviors.
An alternative way to interpret this is
that the teachers’ knowledge of the in-
struction and assessment factors enabled
them to implement these specific inquiry
practices which in turn increased their
ability beliefs for inquiry instruction and
assessment. The dilemma of whether
beliefs proceeds practice is still under
debate (Mansour, 2009), and more re-
search is needed in this area. However,
these data suggest that knowledge may
be a precursor of beliefs and practice.
Our results did not entirely confirm
Vroom’s Motivational Model. Teacher
values were not found to be related to
teacher practice and neither were instru-
mentality beliefs. Furthermore, there
were no significant relationships found
Figure 3. Explicit connections emergent themes and EQUIP constructs. between values, instrumentality, and ex-
pectancy. It may be that the survey used
to measure the VIE components was not
other research has shown the importance in the classroom, and engage in instruction sensitive enough to capture these con-
of teacher knowledge in changing teach- which includes aspects of constructivist- structs. It might also be that one year in
ing practice (Newton, Evans, Leonard, & style teaching (Allinder, 1994; Czerniak & our PD program was not sufficient to
Eastburn, 2012). Our results show that Schriver, 1994; Woolfolk, Rosoff, & Hoy, establish these relationships. Research
teachers who were involved in our pro- 1990). indicates that it takes extended PD ex-
gram for one year significantly improved While these results affirm previous periences to impact teachers’ beliefs
in their ability to engage in higher quality research, the qualitative results offer (Supovitz & Turner, 2000).
inquiry-based instruction. However, not all additional information as to why these What do these findings mean for
teachers showed this significant increase. significant relationships were found. teacher educators and the development
Due to these differences, we wanted Our qualitative results indicate that the of future PD programs geared at increas-
to determine whether the components middle school science teachers in our ing teachers’ ability to engage in quality
of Vroom’s theory, as well as, teacher study explicitly defined inquiry-based inquiry-based teaching? Based on our
knowledge of inquiry-based instruction instruction by focusing mostly on the results, the goals of PD designers should
could help resolve this quandary. instructional aspects (e.g., getting stu- include increasing science teachers’ ef-
Our quantitative data found a signifi- dents to explore concepts, engaging ficacy beliefs for the teaching practices
cant positive relationship between the students in learning, teachers facilitat- being encouraged. This focus on increas-
motivational factor of pre-instructional ing the learning) and assessment aspects ing efficacy beliefs should also be a goal
beliefs (expectancy) and teacher inquiry (e.g., assessing prior knowledge, ongo- of teacher education programs since
practices (specifically instruction and as- ing assessment, utilizing assessment in most pre-service teachers’ experience
sessment). These results are in line with instructional decisions) of inquiry. This in science classrooms do not include
other research regarding the relationship suggests that teacher knowledge of in- inquiry-based learning (Loucks-Horsley
between expectancy beliefs and teacher quiry instruction is involved in the choice et al., 2010). Pre-service and in-service
practice (Haney, Lumpe, Czerniak, & to implement inquiry-based teaching teacher inexperience with inquiry-based
Egan, 2002). Researchers have found practices. Jones and Carter (2007) state teaching can predispose them to having
that teachers with higher efficacy beliefs that science teacher knowledge can im- low ability beliefs regarding inquiry in-
are more likely to try new teaching prac- pact teacher ability beliefs, and Haney struction, as well as a lack of pedagogi-
tices, provide students with more control et al. (1996) found that teacher beliefs cal knowledge regarding how to engage

SUMMER 2017 VOL. 26, NO. 1 7

in inquiry-based teaching. Because of strategies that were clearly and explitly Generation Science Standards: http://
this, pre- and in-service teachers should modeled during the PD program. They ar- www.nextgenscience.org
be provided with ample opportunities gued that the clear and explicit modeling Adams, J. E., Schmidt, F., Weaver, J. C.,
to learn, practice, and reflect upon what of certain inquiry teaching strategies pro- Witzig, S. B., & Zhao, N. (2012). Trans-
it takes to engage in proficient inquiry- vided the teachers with more experience formative professional development:
based instruction. (i.e., knowledge) regarding how inquiry- Inquiry-based college science teaching
Our qualitative results highlight that based teaching should look. institutes. Journal of College Science
teacher knowledge of specific inquiry- Admittedly, the task ahead of PD Teaching, 41(3), 18-25.
based strategies is a key component to facilitators and teacher educators is a Allinder, R. M. (1994). The relationship
teachers engaging in inquiry-based in- challenging one, especially given the ex- between efficacy and the instructional
struction. Therefore PD programs and pectations of the NGSS (Achieve, 2013). practices of special education teachers
teacher education programs should en- While it may be tempting to try and focus and consultants. Teacher Education and
sure that teachers’ knowledge of inquiry only on knowledge or beliefs, research Special Education, 17(2), 86-95.
practices is bolstered. In order to increase indicates that attempting to impact both American Association for Advancement
teacher knowledge of inquiry instruc- results in greater change (Mundry & of Science. (2003). Benchmarks Online.
tion, teacher educators and PD facilita- Loucks-Horsley, 1999). This change Retrieved from Project 2061: http://
tors should seek to answer questions such does not happen quickly (Supovitz & www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/
as: what should I be doing as a teacher?; Turner, 2000) and therefore pre- and online/index.php
what should I expect my students to be in-service teachers should be provided Anderson, R. D. (1996). Study of Curricu-
doing?; how do I encourage discourse with extended experiences that seek to lum Reform. Studies of Education Re-
between students and myself?; how do I increase both knowledge and efficacy form. (Vol. I: Findings and Conclusions).
modify pre-existing activities into rigor- beliefs regarding inquiry instruction. Washington, DC 20402-9328: US Gov-
ous inquiry-based learning experiences?; Our qualitative findings also imply ernment Printing Office, Superintendent
etc… Our findings indicate that our teach- that Vroom’s VIE Theory of Motivation of Documents; Mail Stop: SSOP.
ers had pre-existing (albeit incomplete) may benefit from adding the construct of Anderson, R. D. (2007). Inquiry as an or-
knowledge of how instruction and assess- knowledge into the equation regarding ganizing theme for science curricula. In
ment looked during inquiry-based instruc- individuals’ choice to engage in certain S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.),
tion. In keeping with the constructivist behaviors. However, a more valid and Handbook of research on science
framework that inquiry instruction is built reliable VIE instrument geared toward education (pp. 807-828). New Jersey:
upon, it seems that this prior knowledge inquiry-based instruction would better Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
assisted the teachers in developing new enable researchers to investigate this Atkin, J. M., & Black, P. (2007). History of
knowledge regarding these aspects of in- relationship. science curriculum reform in the United
quiry instruction. This then perhaps led Presently, several questions still re- States and the United Kingdom. In S. K.
to them enacting these specific aspects of main unanswered. Does a second year of Abell, & N. G. Lederman, Handbook of
inquiry-based teaching. PD on inquiry instruction bring about the research on science education (pp. 781-
While we and others (Adams, Schmidt, relationship hypothesized by Vroom’s 806). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Weaver, Witzig, & Zhao, 2012) advocate Theory? What is the predicative effect of Associates.
for PD to be designed in the same con- the VIE components if the second year Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward
structivist style in which inquiry teaching provides support for Vroom’s Theory? a unifying theory of behavioral change.
was developed, we admit that doing this Would having better measures for the Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
could lead to incomplete conceptions of components have provided different re- 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
how to engage in inquiry-based instruc- sults? Are these components important Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The ex-
tion. In our case, we may have focused in teachers sustaining inquiry instruction ercise of control. New York, NY: W. H.
heavily on modeling and reflecting on the years after the PD has been completed? Freeman.
instructional and assessment aspects of Our sample size for this research study Barrow, L. H. (2006). A brief history of
inquiry instruction while giving less atten- is relatively small and therefore some inquiry: From Dewey to standards. Jour-
tion to discourse and curriculum, which caution should be taken in generalizing nal of Science Teacher Education, 17(3),
may be more difficult to model. Further, our results to other populations. Regard- 265-278. doi:DOI: 10.1007/s10972-006-
our results suggest the need to be explicit less, the results and implications provide 9008-5
and clear in defining and modeling the insights for PD facilitators and teacher Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013).
apsects of inquiry instruction being de- educators to consider. Inquiry-based instruction and teaching
veloped. Grigg et al. (2013) found that about nature of science: Are they hap-
the aspects of inquiry instruction that References pening? Journal of Science Teacher
teachers were more likely to engage in Achieve. (2013). Next Generation Sci- Education, 24(3), 497-526. doi:10.1007/
when teaching corresponded to the inquiry ence Standards. Retrieved from Next s10972-012-9314-z

8 SCIENCE EDUCATOR
Chiang, C.-F., & Jang, S. (2008). An expec- for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Journal of Science & Environmental
tancy theory model for hotel employee Aldine Publishing Company. Education, 4(1), 25-48.
motivation. International Journal of Glassman, L. R., & Albarracin, D. Marshall, J. C., Horton, B., Igo, B. L., &
Hospitality Management, 27(2), 313- (2006). Forming attitudes that pre- Switzer, D. M. (2009). K-12 science and
322. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2007.07.017 dict future behavior: A meta-analysis mathematics teachers’ beliefs about and
Ciani, K. D., Summers, J. J., & Easter, M. A. of the attitude-behavior relation. Psy- use of inquiry in the classroom. Interna-
(2008). A “top-down” analysis of high chological Bulletin, 132(5), 778-822. tional Journal of Science and Mathemat-
school teacher motivation. Contemporary doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.778 ics Education, 575-596. doi:10.1007/
Educational Psychology, 33(4), 533-560. Grigg, J., Kelly, K. A., Gamoran, A., & s10763-007-9122-7
doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.04.002 Borman, G. D. (2013). Effects of two Marshall, J. C., Horton, B., & Smart, J. (2009).
Cooper, M. M. (2013). Chemistry and the scientific inquiry professional develop- 4Ex2 instructional model: Three learning
next generation science standards. Jour- ment interventions on teaching prac- constructs to improve praxis in science and
nal of Chemical Education, 90(6), 679- tice. Educational Evaluation and Policy mathematics classrooms. Journal of Sci-
680. doi:10.1021/ed400284c Analysis, 35(1), 38-56. doi:10.3102/ ence Teacher Education, 501-516.
Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach 0162373712461851
Marshall, J. C., Smart, J., & Horton, R. M.
science as inquiry in the rough and Haney, J. J., Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, (2010). The design and validation of
tumble of practice. Journal of Research A. T. (1996). Teacher beliefs and inten- EQUIP: An instrument to assess inquiry-
in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613-642. tions regarding the implementation of based instruction. International Journal of
doi:10.1002/tea.20157 science education reform strands. Jour- Science and Mathematics Education, 299-
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. nal of REsearch in Science Teaching, 312. doi:10.1007/s10763-009-9174-y
(2011). Designing and conducting mixed 33(9), 971-993. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-
2736(199611)33:9<971::AID- Mundry, S., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (1999).
methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
TEA2>3.0.CO;2-S Designing effective professional devel-
SAGE Publications.
opment: Decision points and dilemmas.
Czerniak, C. M. (1990). A study of self- Haney, J. J., Lumpe, A. T., Czerniak, C. M., NISE Brief, 3(1).
efficacy, anxiety, and science knowledge & Egan, V. (2002). From beliefs to
in preservice elementary teachers. Paper actions: The beliefs and actions of teach- National Research Council. (1996). The na-
presented at the National Association ers implementing change. Journal of tional science education standards. Wash-
for Research in Science Teaching. At- Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 171- ington, DC: National Academy Press.
lanta, GA. 187. doi:10.1023/A:1016565016116 Newton, K. J., Evans, B. R., Leonard,
Czerniak, C. M., & Schriver, M. (1994). Jones, M. G., & Carter, G. (2007). Science J., & Eastburn, J. A. (2012). Preser-
An examination of preservice science Teacher Attitudes and Beliefs. In S. K. vice elementary teachers’ mathematics
teachers’ beliefs and behaviors as re- Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Hand- content knowledge and teacher effi-
lated to self-efficacy. Journal of Science book of research on science education cacy. School Science and Mathematics,
Teacher Education, 5(3), 77-86. (pp. 1067-1104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence 112(5), 289-299. doi:10.1111/j.1949-
Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 8594.2012.00145.x
Czubaj, C. A. (1996). Maintaining teacher
motivation. Education, 116(3), 372-379. Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). NRC. (2012). A framework for K-12 sci-
Relationships matter: Linking teacher ence education: Practices, crosscutting
Desouza, J. M., Boone, W. J., & Yilmaz, O.
(2004). A study of science teaching self- support to student engagement and concepts, and core ideas. National Aca-
efficacy and outcome expectancy beliefs achievement. Journal of School Health, demics Press.
of teachers in India. Science Education, 74(7), 262-273. doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561. Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching scientific prac-
88(6), 837-854. doi:10.1002/sce.20001 2004.tb08283.x tices: Meeting the challenge of change.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, Lotter , C., Harwood, W. S., & Bonner, J. Journal of Science Teacher Education,
A. H. (2004). School engagement: Poten- (2006). Overcoming a learning bottle- 25(2), 177-196. doi:10.1007/s10972-014-
tial of the concept, state of the evidence. neck: Inquiry professional develop- 9384-1
Review of Educational Research, 74(1), ment for secondary science teachers. Petri, H. L., & Govern, J. M. (2004).
59-109. Journal of Science Teacher Education, Motivation: Theory, research, and
Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Teachers’ knowl- 17(3), 185-216. doi:10.1007/s10972- applications (5th ed.). Belmont, CA:
edge and beliefs about subject matter 005-9002-3 c Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
and its impact on instruction. In J. Gess- Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, Pop, M. M., Dixon, P., & Grove, C. M.
Newsome, & G. N. Lederman (Eds.), S., Love, N., & Hewson, P. W. (2010). (2010). Research experiences for teach-
Examining pedagogical content knowl- Designing professional development for ers (RET): Motivation, expectations,
edge: The construct and its implication for teachers of science and mathematics and changes to teaching practices due
science education (pp. 51-94). Dordrecht, (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. to professional program involvement.
the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. Mansour, N. (2009). Science teachers’ be- Journal of Science Teacher Education,
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The liefs and practices: Issues, implications, 21(2), 127-147. doi:10.1007/s10972-
Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies and research agendas. International 009-9167-2

SUMMER 2017 VOL. 26, NO. 1 9

Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, Supovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The ef- their beliefs about managing students.
S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). fects of professional development on science Teaching and Teacher Education, 6(2),
Classroom emotional climate, student teaching practices and classroom culture. 137-148.
engagement, and academic achieve- Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
ment. Journal of Educational Psychol- 37(9), 963-980. doi:10.1002/1098-2736 Daniel M. Alston, Department of Read-
ogy, 104(3), 700-712. doi:10.1037/ (200011)37:9<963::AID-TEA6> ing and Elementary Education, College of
a0027268 3.0.CO;2-0 Education, University of North Carolina at
Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2012). Charlotte, NC 28223
qualitative researchers. Los Angeles: Using Multivariate Statistics (6th ed.).
SAGE Publications Inc. Pearson. Jeff. C. Marshall, Department of Teach-
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of ing and Learning, Moore School of Edu-
Thoonen, E. E., Sleegers, P. J., Oort, F. J., cation, Clemson University, SC 29634,
Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks. Peetsma, T. T., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How Clemson, USA
Sunal, D. W., Hodges, J., Sunal, C. S., to improve teaching practices: The role of
Whitaker, K. W., Freeman, L. M., teacher motivation, organizational factors, V. Serbay Zambak, Department of Math-
Edwards, L., . . . Odell, M. (2001). and leadership practices. Educational ematics, Statistics and Computer Science,
Teaching science in higher education: Administration Quarterly, 47(3), 496- Marquette University, WI 53202 Milwaukee,
Faculty professional development and 536. doi:10.1177/0013161X11400185 USA
barriers to change. School of Science
Van Eerde, W., & Thierry, H. (1996).
and Mathematics, 101(5), 246-257. Corresponding author and person to whom
Vroom’s expectancy models and work-
doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2001.tb18027.x reprints request should be addressed:
related criteria: A meta-analysis. Journal
Sunal, D., & Wright, E. (2006). Teacher of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 575-586. Daniel M. Alston Assistant Professor of
perceptions of science standards in K-12 doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.575 Elementary Science Education University
classrooms: An Alabama case study. In of North Carolina at Charlotte Department
D. Sunal, & E. Wright (Eds.), The impact Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation. of Reading and Elementary Education
of state and national standards on K-12 San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc. College of Education 9201 University City
science teaching (pp. 7-49). Greenwich, Woolfolk, A. E., Rosoff, B., & Hoy, W. K. Blvd. Charlotte, NC 28223 704-687-8702
CT: Information Age Publishing. (1990). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and (office) Email: [email protected]

10 SCIENCE EDUCATOR