What beliefs do chemistry teachers have about instructional explanations? An exploratory investigation

Abstract

Instructional explanations in chemistry lessons are planned language products explicitly communicated by the explainer (teacher) to effectively convey specific subject matter (chemical content) to the addressees (students), aligned with didactic principles. The primary aim of these explanations is to enhance students’ understanding of the concepts presented. While previous studies have largely focused on establishing general quality criteria for subject-appropriate and audience-centered instructional explanations, limited research has explored chemistry teachers’ beliefs about instructional explanations in the classroom. This paper addresses this gap by presenting insights from an exploratory investigation into these beliefs within the context of chemistry lessons. Semi-structured, guided interviews were conducted with chemistry teachers (N = 13) from various types of German schools, with data analyzed using Kuckartz and Rädiker's qualitative content analysis methodology. Findings indicate that chemistry teachers hold complex and sometimes contradictory beliefs about the use of instructional explanations. On one hand, they recognize instructional explanations as essential due to the abstract nature of chemistry content (subject matter perspective) and as beneficial for student learning (audience perspective). On the other hand, they express concerns that instructional explanations may foster cognitive passivity among students and reinforce a transmissive approach to knowledge transfer. This insight suggests that teachers’ practical perceptions of instructional explanations differ in some respects from those emphasized in educational research. However, results suggest that teachers’ beliefs about instructional explanations evolve throughout teacher training, becoming more positive at advanced stages. Additionally, insights gained from teacher interviews into the interrelated and simultaneous beliefs about the advantages and disadvantages of instructional explanations highlight the nuanced perspectives that teachers bring to their practice. They demonstrate that teachers use instructional explanations in a deliberate and context-sensitive manner, balancing their effectiveness for specific learning goals with considerations of student autonomy and engagement. Finally, the findings provide relevant implications for teacher education and practice, as well as directions for future research.