Hands-on: Science education reform

Journal of Teacher Education

Volumn 47, Issue 5, 1996, Pages 375-385

  Vesilind, Elizabeth M ^a   Jones, M Gail ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039607796     PISSN: 00224871     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0022487196047005007     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Anderson, R. (1992). Perspectives on complexity: An essay on curricular reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 861-876.
3. Anderson, R., Anderson, B., Varanka-Martin, M., Romagnano, L., Bielenberg, J., Flory, M., Mieras, B., & Whitworth, J. (1994). Issues of curriculum reform in science, mathematics and higher order thinking across the disciplines. Washington: U.S. Department of Education.
4. Burns, J., Okey, J., & Wise, L. (1985). Development of an integrated process skill test: TIPS II. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 169-177.
5. Carson, R. (1965). The sense of wonder. New York: Harper & Row.
6. Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 597-604.
7. Dillashaw, G., & Okey, J. (1980). Test of the integrated process skills for secondary science students. Science Education, 64, 601-608.
8. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan.
9. Franklin, M. E. (1993). Statewide improvement in elementary mathematics and science education through peer training (Final Report of US Department of Education Project R168D00258-92). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Mathematics and Science Education Network.
10. Jones, L., Mullis, I., Raizen, S., Weiss, I., & Weston, E. (1992). The 1990 report card: NAEP's assessment of fourth, eighth, and twelfth graders. Washington: National Center for Education Statistics.
11. Kidder, T. (1989). Among school children. New York: Avon Books.
12. Loucks-Horsley, S., Carlson, M., Brink, L., Horowitz, P., Marsh, D., Pratt, H., Roy, K., & Worth, K. (1989). Developing and supporting teachers for elementary science education. Andover, MA: National Center for Improving Science Education.
13. Loucks-Horsley, S., Kapitan, R., Carlson, M., Kuerbis, P., Clark, R., Melle, G., Sache, T., & Walton, E. (1990). Elementary school science for the '90s. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
14. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. National Education Goals Panel. (1991). The national education goals report: Building a nation of learners. Washington: National Education Goals Panel.
16. Penta, M. O., Mitchell, J. W., & Franklin, M. E. (1993, January). Reliability studies of a needs assessment instrument for elementary school mathematics and science programs in North Carolina. Paper presented at the meeting of the North Carolina Association for Research in Education, Greensboro, NC.
17. Raizen, S., & Michelsohn, A. (1994). The future of science in the elementary schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18. Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
19. Sivertsen, M. L. (1993). State of the art: Transforming ideas for teaching and learning science. Washington: U.S. Department of Education.
20. Tobin, K. (Ed.). (1993). The practice of constructivism in science education. Washington: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
21. Weiss, I. (1994). A profile of science and mathematics education in the United States: 1993. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.