title: Developing culturally responsive psychology curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand

authors: Wairoa-Harrison, Sophia

abstract: There are some significant wins in the development of a culturally competent undergraduate psychology curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand. These include how Mātauranga Māori is incorporated into research methodology papers, neuroimaging papers, and degree offerings. However, the number of specifically Māori-focused papers has halved since 2007. Further research is needed to gauge students' experiences of the quality of cultural competency in these papers.

text: Developing culturally responsive psychology curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand There are some significant wins in the development of a culturally competent undergraduate psychology curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand. These include how Mātauranga Māori is incorporated into research methodology papers, neuroimaging papers, and degree offerings. However, the number of specifically Māori-focused papers has halved since 2007. Further research is needed to gauge students' experiences of the quality of cultural competency in these papers.

year: 2023-02-01

title: Te whakaako i te reo Māori i te kura auraki tuarua i Aotearoa nei: Kei tua o te awe māpere. The teaching of te reo Māori in English-medium secondary schools in New Zealand: Beyond the mask.

authors: Nock, Sophie

subjects: language curricula

abstract: He taonga te reo Māori nō tuawhakarere, nō tuauriuri, whāioio, nā te atua i homai kia poipoia e te iwi Māori hei reo kōrero mō te hunga kaingākau, mō te hunga kāore anō kia whānau noa.  Ahakoa ia he toimaha tonu te hauora o te reo Māori, nā te mahi tūkino (a ētahi).  I roto i ngā tau whā tekau kua ara ake ngā momo rongoā hei whakahauora, hei whakatairanga i te reo Māori, nā, ko Te Kōhanga Reo tērā, ko te Kura Kaupapa Māori tērā, ko Te Wharekura tērā, aha atu, aha atu.  Ka mutu, i te tau 1987 i whakamanahia ai te reo Māori hei reo tūturu o tēnei whenua.  Ahakoa he aha e mea ana te Tāhūhū o te Mātauranga ehara i te mea me whai wāhi te reo Māori hei reo ako i roto i ngā kura tuarua puta noa i te motu.  Engari, ko te raruraru kua whai wāhi kē ētahi atu reo o te ao, kaua ko te reo Māori.  Kāti, i te tau 2009 i tatū ai Te Aho Arataki Marau mō te Ako i Te Reo Māori, ā, ki reira whai wāhi ai te reo Māori.  Nā, ko tā te kura tuarua mahi he tautoko mārika i te reo Māori, mā te whakaako i te reo Māori, e tika ana me pērā, nā te mea, ko te nuinga o ngā tamariki Māori e haere ana ki a ia ako ai.  Mōhio pai i whakapeto ngoi ngā kaiwhakaako reo Māori me te matatau anō o ētahi ki te reo hoki, engari, ki tā te pūrongo rangahau a Te Tari Arotake Mātauranga kīhai i tino eke panuku ngā mahi whakaako.  Ko ngā tino take, ko te whakangungu kaiwhakaako, ko te tautoko me te whakahaere a te kura hoki.

Nō reira, ko te whāinga matua o tēnei rangahau kia tirohia me pēhea e whakaako ai te reo Māori ki te kura tuarua, (kaua i ngā wharekura) i Aotearoa.  Mai i te rau tau tekau mā waru ka tātaria ētahi o ngā kōrero whanake e hāngai pū ana ki te whakaako me te ako i (t)ētahi atu reo, ko ia te wāhanga tuarua.  Whai muri mai i tērā (kei te wāhanga tuatoru) ko ngā patapatai me ngā uiuitanga, ā, ko tā te patapatai he kukume mai i ngā whakapono, i ngā whakaaro, i ngā waiaro o te hunga kaiwhakaako, ko tā te uiuitanga e whakatātūtū i te rētotanga o te kaupapa.  Ka mutu, i whārikihia ngā whakakitenga, ngā whakahoki kōrero ki taua wāhanga.  I te mutunga iho i whakapau kaha ngā kaiwhakaako ki te whakatutuki i ngā mahi, ahakoa ngā piki me ngā heke.  Kei ngā wāhanga e rua (4 & 5) ngā kōrero mō ngā tūmomo rauemi e whakamahia ana e ngā kaiwhakaako, arā, ko ngā momo pukapuka (4) me ngā tūmomo rauemi o te ipurangi nā Te Tāhūhū o te Mātauranga i whakarato (5).  E kī ana ngā whakaputanga, tuatahi, kīhai aua rauemi i tino whakaatu mai i ngā momo whanaketanga i roto i ngā tau whā tekau neke atu mō te whakaako i te reo tuarua, hou rānei, tuarua, kāhore hoki i tino hāngai pū ēnei rauemi ki te Marau mō te Ako i Te Reo Māori i te kura tuarua me te hāngai anō hoki ki te āhua o te whakaako i te reo mā te ‘Communicative Language Teaching’.  Hei whaiwhai ake i ngā rauemi i tātaria ētahi o ngā karaehe reo (te wāhanga 6) mā ngā wehewehetanga matua o te whakaako reo.  Mai i taua tātaritanga i kitea mai ētahi raruraru, tuatahi, kāhore ngā tauira/akonga i whai wāhi ki te kōrero (i roto tonu i te karaehe), tuarua, kāhore e taea te whakawhitiwhiti kōrero ki a rātou anō, tuatoru, kāhore rātou i te mahi tahi anō hoki.  Hei whakakapi ake i tēnei rangahau, kei te wāhanga whakamutunga (7) te whakakaokao mai o ngā whakakitenga katoa, me te whakatakoto o ngā tūtohutanga kia anga whakamua ai. 

It has been acknowledged that te reo Māori is a taonga and, as such, is subject to the protections guaranteed under the terms of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.  Since 1987, it has been an official language of Aotearoa.  Its future is, however, very far from secure and instructed language learning continues to play a significant part in the revitalisation agenda.  Even so, although schools are now required to offer a language other than the language of instruction to pupils in Years 7 to 10, and although over two thirds of Māori students currently attend schools in which English is the main language of instruction, schools are not required to include te reo Māori in their language offering.  In addition, although curriculum guidelines documents for a number of foreign languages have been available for many years, it was not until 2009 that the final version of a curriculum guidelines document for the teaching and learning of te reo Māori in English-medium schools became available.  Furthermore, while there clearly are some extremely competent teachers of the language, Education Review Office (ERO) reports indicate that all is not well so far as the teaching and learning of te reo Māori in English-medium secondary schools is concerned.  The problems identified relate not to teachers' proficiency in the language but to their limited pedagogical knowledge.  As ERO has indicated, this raises questions about the initial training of teachers of te reo Māori and the ways in which all schools manage and support them. 

The overall aim of the research reported here is to investigate the teaching of te reo Māori in English-medium secondary schools in Aotearoa.  Following a critical review of selected literature on developments in the teaching and learning of additional languages since the end of the 18th Century (Chapter 2), there is a report on a survey (involving questionnaire responses and semi-structured interviews) of a sample of teachers of te reo Māori in English-medium secondary schools.  That survey focuses on their educational and linguistic backgrounds and their attitudes and approaches to a range of issues associated with the teaching and learning of the language in school settings (Chapter 3).  Overall, the findings indicate that while these teachers are doing their best to provide a high quality educational experience for their students, they are doing so in the face of a number of significant barriers relating, in particular, to the limited nature of the pre-service training they have received, and the range of additional duties they are expected to perform.  In addition, the survey revealed some concerns about the impact of national assessment on teaching and learning and about the teaching materials and resources that are available.  The next two chapters report on the analysis of a sample of textbooks which are widely used in secondary schools (Chapter 4) and a sample of resources made available by the Ministry of Education (Chapter 5), the main findings being that these are, in the main, (a) inconsistent with both research-based developments in the teaching of additional languages and the expectations relating to communicative language teaching as outlined in the curriculum guidelines, and (b) that these resources do not align with the new curriculum.  The analysis of a sample of lessons taught in secondary schools follows (Chapter 6).  That analysis, conducted in relation to a number of focus points, reveals some significant problems, including the fact that the students were provided with few opportunities to contribute, to interact with one another, and to engage in genuinely communicative activities.  The final chapter (Chapter 7) provides an overview of the findings and includes some suggestions about a possible way forward.

text: Te whakaako i te reo Māori i te kura auraki tuarua i Aotearoa nei: Kei tua o te awe māpere. The teaching of te reo Māori in English-medium secondary schools in New Zealand: Beyond the mask. He taonga te reo Māori nō tuawhakarere, nō tuauriuri, whāioio, nā te atua i homai kia poipoia e te iwi Māori hei reo kōrero mō te hunga kaingākau, mō te hunga kāore anō kia whānau noa.  Ahakoa ia he toimaha tonu te hauora o te reo Māori, nā te mahi tūkino (a ētahi).  I roto i ngā tau whā tekau kua ara ake ngā momo rongoā hei whakahauora, hei whakatairanga i te reo Māori, nā, ko Te Kōhanga Reo tērā, ko te Kura Kaupapa Māori tērā, ko Te Wharekura tērā, aha atu, aha atu.  Ka mutu, i te tau 1987 i whakamanahia ai te reo Māori hei reo tūturu o tēnei whenua.  Ahakoa he aha e mea ana te Tāhūhū o te Mātauranga ehara i te mea me whai wāhi te reo Māori hei reo ako i roto i ngā kura tuarua puta noa i te motu.  Engari, ko te raruraru kua whai wāhi kē ētahi atu reo o te ao, kaua ko te reo Māori.  Kāti, i te tau 2009 i tatū ai Te Aho Arataki Marau mō te Ako i Te Reo Māori, ā, ki reira whai wāhi ai te reo Māori.  Nā, ko tā te kura tuarua mahi he tautoko mārika i te reo Māori, mā te whakaako i te reo Māori, e tika ana me pērā, nā te mea, ko te nuinga o ngā tamariki Māori e haere ana ki a ia ako ai.  Mōhio pai i whakapeto ngoi ngā kaiwhakaako reo Māori me te matatau anō o ētahi ki te reo hoki, engari, ki tā te pūrongo rangahau a Te Tari Arotake Mātauranga kīhai i tino eke panuku ngā mahi whakaako.  Ko ngā tino take, ko te whakangungu kaiwhakaako, ko te tautoko me te whakahaere a te kura hoki.

Nō reira, ko te whāinga matua o tēnei rangahau kia tirohia me pēhea e whakaako ai te reo Māori ki te kura tuarua, (kaua i ngā wharekura) i Aotearoa.  Mai i te rau tau tekau mā waru ka tātaria ētahi o ngā kōrero whanake e hāngai pū ana ki te whakaako me te ako i (t)ētahi atu reo, ko ia te wāhanga tuarua.  Whai muri mai i tērā (kei te wāhanga tuatoru) ko ngā patapatai me ngā uiuitanga, ā, ko tā te patapatai he kukume mai i ngā whakapono, i ngā whakaaro, i ngā waiaro o te hunga kaiwhakaako, ko tā te uiuitanga e whakatātūtū i te rētotanga o te kaupapa.  Ka mutu, i whārikihia ngā whakakitenga, ngā whakahoki kōrero ki taua wāhanga.  I te mutunga iho i whakapau kaha ngā kaiwhakaako ki te whakatutuki i ngā mahi, ahakoa ngā piki me ngā heke.  Kei ngā wāhanga e rua (4 & 5) ngā kōrero mō ngā tūmomo rauemi e whakamahia ana e ngā kaiwhakaako, arā, ko ngā momo pukapuka (4) me ngā tūmomo rauemi o te ipurangi nā Te Tāhūhū o te Mātauranga i whakarato (5).  E kī ana ngā whakaputanga, tuatahi, kīhai aua rauemi i tino whakaatu mai i ngā momo whanaketanga i roto i ngā tau whā tekau neke atu mō te whakaako i te reo tuarua, hou rānei, tuarua, kāhore hoki i tino hāngai pū ēnei rauemi ki te Marau mō te Ako i Te Reo Māori i te kura tuarua me te hāngai anō hoki ki te āhua o te whakaako i te reo mā te ‘Communicative Language Teaching’.  Hei whaiwhai ake i ngā rauemi i tātaria ētahi o ngā karaehe reo (te wāhanga 6) mā ngā wehewehetanga matua o te whakaako reo.  Mai i taua tātaritanga i kitea mai ētahi raruraru, tuatahi, kāhore ngā tauira/akonga i whai wāhi ki te kōrero (i roto tonu i te karaehe), tuarua, kāhore e taea te whakawhitiwhiti kōrero ki a rātou anō, tuatoru, kāhore rātou i te mahi tahi anō hoki.  Hei whakakapi ake i tēnei rangahau, kei te wāhanga whakamutunga (7) te whakakaokao mai o ngā whakakitenga katoa, me te whakatakoto o ngā tūtohutanga kia anga whakamua ai. 

It has been acknowledged that te reo Māori is a taonga and, as such, is subject to the protections guaranteed under the terms of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.  Since 1987, it has been an official language of Aotearoa.  Its future is, however, very far from secure and instructed language learning continues to play a significant part in the revitalisation agenda.  Even so, although schools are now required to offer a language other than the language of instruction to pupils in Years 7 to 10, and although over two thirds of Māori students currently attend schools in which English is the main language of instruction, schools are not required to include te reo Māori in their language offering.  In addition, although curriculum guidelines documents for a number of foreign languages have been available for many years, it was not until 2009 that the final version of a curriculum guidelines document for the teaching and learning of te reo Māori in English-medium schools became available.  Furthermore, while there clearly are some extremely competent teachers of the language, Education Review Office (ERO) reports indicate that all is not well so far as the teaching and learning of te reo Māori in English-medium secondary schools is concerned.  The problems identified relate not to teachers' proficiency in the language but to their limited pedagogical knowledge.  As ERO has indicated, this raises questions about the initial training of teachers of te reo Māori and the ways in which all schools manage and support them. 

The overall aim of the research reported here is to investigate the teaching of te reo Māori in English-medium secondary schools in Aotearoa.  Following a critical review of selected literature on developments in the teaching and learning of additional languages since the end of the 18th Century (Chapter 2), there is a report on a survey (involving questionnaire responses and semi-structured interviews) of a sample of teachers of te reo Māori in English-medium secondary schools.  That survey focuses on their educational and linguistic backgrounds and their attitudes and approaches to a range of issues associated with the teaching and learning of the language in school settings (Chapter 3).  Overall, the findings indicate that while these teachers are doing their best to provide a high quality educational experience for their students, they are doing so in the face of a number of significant barriers relating, in particular, to the limited nature of the pre-service training they have received, and the range of additional duties they are expected to perform.  In addition, the survey revealed some concerns about the impact of national assessment on teaching and learning and about the teaching materials and resources that are available.  The next two chapters report on the analysis of a sample of textbooks which are widely used in secondary schools (Chapter 4) and a sample of resources made available by the Ministry of Education (Chapter 5), the main findings being that these are, in the main, (a) inconsistent with both research-based developments in the teaching of additional languages and the expectations relating to communicative language teaching as outlined in the curriculum guidelines, and (b) that these resources do not align with the new curriculum.  The analysis of a sample of lessons taught in secondary schools follows (Chapter 6).  That analysis, conducted in relation to a number of focus points, reveals some significant problems, including the fact that the students were provided with few opportunities to contribute, to interact with one another, and to engage in genuinely communicative activities.  The final chapter (Chapter 7) provides an overview of the findings and includes some suggestions about a possible way forward.

year: 2014

title: Improving the Training of Pre-Service Physics Teachers in Malaysia using Didaktik Analysis

authors: Ishak, Mohd. Zaki

subjects: Physics Education

abstract: The research in this thesis examined the use of a didaktik-based approach to thinking about teaching and learning to the training of pre-service physics teachers in a Malaysian teacher training programme. The process of developing a specific content knowledge (real or true physics) was done through a didaktik analysis of specific physics content, to develop physics content knowledge suitable for schooling, in a particular educational context. Didaktik analysis used as intervention in this study involved: analysing specific physics content as contained in the curriculum specifications and textbooks; analysis of literature on students' alternative conceptions; developing a lesson plan; developing teaching sequences that involve teaching and learning activities, enacting lesson plans and teaching sequence in the microteaching and practicum, and subsequent reflection.
Klafki's (2000) model of didaktik analysis was used as the basis of an intervention employed in a physics teaching methods course (TT4133) at the School of Education, University of Malaysia Sabah (UMS). The intervention consisted of the 14 week course: first seven weeks on theoretical aspects of teaching methods, followed the usual course synopsis, but with modifications in content resulting from didaktik analysis, and the remainder dealt with microteaching; and 8 weeks practicum.  To illustrate the use of didaktik analysis in the training programme, the specific physics content in the areas of force and motion was provided as an example, showing how this was presented to the pre-service physics teachers in the programme. The researcher began with a conceptual analysis of force and motion as presented in the Malaysian secondary physics curriculum specifications and textbooks. This was followed by analysis of the science education literature on students' alternative conceptions involving force and motion, analysis of textbooks presentations of force and motion, and importantly a synopsis of the history of scientific thinking about force and motion. Subsequently, the pre-service teachers were required to prepare lesson plans aided by the researcher based on the above tasks, and this was followed by the development of a teaching sequence which was intended to be implemented in teaching practice with peers (called microteaching in Malaysia), and after further refinement in the practicum in a real classroom (under supervision). 
Participants were third year (15 males and 20 females) and fourth year (18 males and 60 females) pre-service physics teachers in their final year of undergraduate studies. The third year cohort consisted of experienced primary school teachers seeking to become secondary school physics teachers via a three-year conversion course. The fourth year cohort had no prior teaching experience, but held degree-level qualifications in physics. Quantitative data were gathered through two tests of conceptual understanding, The Test of Understanding Graph in Kinematics, TUG-K and The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, FMCE tests, and a purpose-designed instrument the Beliefs About Physics Teaching, BAPT questionnaire. Qualitative data were constructed through the inspection of self-written reports about prior physics learning experiences, inspection of assignments on the didaktik analysis of physics, and individual lesson plans. Video recording and field notes made during observations of microteaching and the practicum, examination of 'written reflections' done in the middle of the methods course, during the practicum, and in the final examinations, and interviews and field notes made by the researcher during meetings with the pre-service physics teachers, completed the data corpus. 
The research findings indicate that generally both cohorts had difficulty understanding kinematics graphs, and weak conceptual understanding of Newtonian concepts. These findings support the findings from the BAPT questionnaire and interviews, which point to perceptions of lack of ability to teach physics, negative attitudes towards teaching specific physics topics at the secondary level, and overall low physics teaching self-efficacy. Overall the findings from the BAPT questionnaire and interviews, before the intervention based on didaktik analysis of physics suggest that these pre-service physics teachers' attitude toward, and beliefs about, physics teaching were based on career interest in teaching, and not on any intrinsic interest in physics or physics teaching as a profession.
After the didaktik analysis intervention it seems that the pre-service physics teachers' teaching practices were shaped by their beliefs about, and experiences of, the physics teaching methods course generally, and the didaktik analysis experience in particular. Overall, it seems this part of methods course helped to improve pre-service physics teachers' understanding of specific physics content, improved their attitude-toward-physics and teaching, helped them to identify problems with students' learning of physics concepts, and helped their teaching practice, subsequently making them more confident about teaching secondary school physics.
The pre-service physics teachers commented on the value of didaktik analysis and this was evident in the microteaching, but not in lesson plans and teaching sequence used in the practicum. It seems this was as a result of a limited amount and a drive by schools to adhere to curriculum specifications. Overall it seems the introduction of didaktik-based analysis intervention increased participants' confidence to teach secondary school physics and that these pre-service physics teachers have gone some way in developing into reflective practitioners in terms of their experiences of: their own secondary physics learning; their physics methods course, both of which led to a better and deeper understanding of physics and methods course content; and the teaching practices in the microteaching and practicum, both of which gave confidence to teach secondary school physics.
Three recommendations are made from this thesis. First, the introduction of a didaktik analysis-based intervention in physics teaching methods courses such as the one in this study, necessitates identification in advance of pre-service physics teachers' attitude toward, and beliefs about physics teaching, along with their attitude-toward-physics and learning, their physics teaching self-efficacy beliefs, and their conceptual understanding of specific physics content. Second, didaktik analysis involving other specific physics content, with other cohorts of pre-service physics teachers, experienced secondary physics teachers, and physicists, is worthy of consideration. Third, the success of the use of a didaktik-based analysis in a physics teaching methods courses requires scaffolding of the teaching sequences employed, and strong support from associate/mentor teachers during the practicum, if didaktik-based teaching is to be realized in the classroom.

text: Improving the Training of Pre-Service Physics Teachers in Malaysia using Didaktik Analysis The research in this thesis examined the use of a didaktik-based approach to thinking about teaching and learning to the training of pre-service physics teachers in a Malaysian teacher training programme. The process of developing a specific content knowledge (real or true physics) was done through a didaktik analysis of specific physics content, to develop physics content knowledge suitable for schooling, in a particular educational context. Didaktik analysis used as intervention in this study involved: analysing specific physics content as contained in the curriculum specifications and textbooks; analysis of literature on students' alternative conceptions; developing a lesson plan; developing teaching sequences that involve teaching and learning activities, enacting lesson plans and teaching sequence in the microteaching and practicum, and subsequent reflection.
Klafki's (2000) model of didaktik analysis was used as the basis of an intervention employed in a physics teaching methods course (TT4133) at the School of Education, University of Malaysia Sabah (UMS). The intervention consisted of the 14 week course: first seven weeks on theoretical aspects of teaching methods, followed the usual course synopsis, but with modifications in content resulting from didaktik analysis, and the remainder dealt with microteaching; and 8 weeks practicum.  To illustrate the use of didaktik analysis in the training programme, the specific physics content in the areas of force and motion was provided as an example, showing how this was presented to the pre-service physics teachers in the programme. The researcher began with a conceptual analysis of force and motion as presented in the Malaysian secondary physics curriculum specifications and textbooks. This was followed by analysis of the science education literature on students' alternative conceptions involving force and motion, analysis of textbooks presentations of force and motion, and importantly a synopsis of the history of scientific thinking about force and motion. Subsequently, the pre-service teachers were required to prepare lesson plans aided by the researcher based on the above tasks, and this was followed by the development of a teaching sequence which was intended to be implemented in teaching practice with peers (called microteaching in Malaysia), and after further refinement in the practicum in a real classroom (under supervision). 
Participants were third year (15 males and 20 females) and fourth year (18 males and 60 females) pre-service physics teachers in their final year of undergraduate studies. The third year cohort consisted of experienced primary school teachers seeking to become secondary school physics teachers via a three-year conversion course. The fourth year cohort had no prior teaching experience, but held degree-level qualifications in physics. Quantitative data were gathered through two tests of conceptual understanding, The Test of Understanding Graph in Kinematics, TUG-K and The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, FMCE tests, and a purpose-designed instrument the Beliefs About Physics Teaching, BAPT questionnaire. Qualitative data were constructed through the inspection of self-written reports about prior physics learning experiences, inspection of assignments on the didaktik analysis of physics, and individual lesson plans. Video recording and field notes made during observations of microteaching and the practicum, examination of 'written reflections' done in the middle of the methods course, during the practicum, and in the final examinations, and interviews and field notes made by the researcher during meetings with the pre-service physics teachers, completed the data corpus. 
The research findings indicate that generally both cohorts had difficulty understanding kinematics graphs, and weak conceptual understanding of Newtonian concepts. These findings support the findings from the BAPT questionnaire and interviews, which point to perceptions of lack of ability to teach physics, negative attitudes towards teaching specific physics topics at the secondary level, and overall low physics teaching self-efficacy. Overall the findings from the BAPT questionnaire and interviews, before the intervention based on didaktik analysis of physics suggest that these pre-service physics teachers' attitude toward, and beliefs about, physics teaching were based on career interest in teaching, and not on any intrinsic interest in physics or physics teaching as a profession.
After the didaktik analysis intervention it seems that the pre-service physics teachers' teaching practices were shaped by their beliefs about, and experiences of, the physics teaching methods course generally, and the didaktik analysis experience in particular. Overall, it seems this part of methods course helped to improve pre-service physics teachers' understanding of specific physics content, improved their attitude-toward-physics and teaching, helped them to identify problems with students' learning of physics concepts, and helped their teaching practice, subsequently making them more confident about teaching secondary school physics.
The pre-service physics teachers commented on the value of didaktik analysis and this was evident in the microteaching, but not in lesson plans and teaching sequence used in the practicum. It seems this was as a result of a limited amount and a drive by schools to adhere to curriculum specifications. Overall it seems the introduction of didaktik-based analysis intervention increased participants' confidence to teach secondary school physics and that these pre-service physics teachers have gone some way in developing into reflective practitioners in terms of their experiences of: their own secondary physics learning; their physics methods course, both of which led to a better and deeper understanding of physics and methods course content; and the teaching practices in the microteaching and practicum, both of which gave confidence to teach secondary school physics.
Three recommendations are made from this thesis. First, the introduction of a didaktik analysis-based intervention in physics teaching methods courses such as the one in this study, necessitates identification in advance of pre-service physics teachers' attitude toward, and beliefs about physics teaching, along with their attitude-toward-physics and learning, their physics teaching self-efficacy beliefs, and their conceptual understanding of specific physics content. Second, didaktik analysis involving other specific physics content, with other cohorts of pre-service physics teachers, experienced secondary physics teachers, and physicists, is worthy of consideration. Third, the success of the use of a didaktik-based analysis in a physics teaching methods courses requires scaffolding of the teaching sequences employed, and strong support from associate/mentor teachers during the practicum, if didaktik-based teaching is to be realized in the classroom.

year: 2008