Blended Science: The Rewards and Challenges of Integrating the Science Disciplines for Instruction

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 98, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 340-348

  McComas, William F ^a   Wang, HsingChi A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347968176     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.1998.tb17430.x     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Adams, T. (1971). A review of unified science and the high school. School Science and Mathematics, 71, 495–500.
2. Aldridge, B. (1989, January). Essential changes in secondary science: Scope, sequence, and coordination. NSTA Reports!, pp. 4–5. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
3. Aldridge, B. (1992). Project on scope, sequence, and coordination: A new synthesis for improving science education. Scope, sequence, and coordination of secondary school science, 2: Relevant research. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: Author.
5. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. NY: Oxford University Press.
6. Ashton, P., & Webb, R. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers' sense of efficacy and student achievement. White Plains, NY: Longman.
7. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
8. Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9. California State Department of Education (1990). The California framework for science instruction. Sacramento: Author.
10. Case, S. (1988). History of reform in science education. Developing science education goals, Science education, science curriculum concept paper. Salem: Oregon State Department of Education.
11. Crow, L. W., and Aldridge, B. G. (1995). A project on scope, sequence and coordination of secondary school science. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 392 631).
12. De Garmo, C. (1907). Most pressing problems concerning the elementary course of study. In C. A. McMurry (Ed.), Firstyearbook of the national Herbart society for the scientific study of teaching. (2nd ed.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13. Dewey, J. (1900). The school and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14. Downing, C. (1996). “How we doin'?”: More findings from the California SS&C project evaluation. California Classroom Science, 8(1), 2, 11.
15. Drake, S. (1993). Planning integrated curriculum: The call to adventure. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum.
16. Eggebrecht, J., Dagenais, R., Dosch, D., Merczak, N. J., Park, M. N., Styer, S. C., & Workman, D. (1996). Reconnecting the sciences. Educational Leadership, 53(8), 4–9.
17. Eisner, E. (1992). A slice of advice. Educational Researcher, 21, 29–30.
18. Fogarty, R. (1991). Ten ways to integrate curriculum. Educational Leadership, 49, 61–65.
19. Gagné, R. (1965). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
20. Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 569–582.
21. Goar, F. D., & Worthington, N. (1972). Issues. Prism II, 1, 7. Columbus, OH: CUSE.
22. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. New York: State University of New York Press.
23. Hall, W. C. (1978). Integrated science. Prospects, 8(1), 58–65.
24. Herbart, J. F. (1895). The science of education: Its general principles deduced from its aims (H. M. Felkin & E. Felkin, Trans.). Boston: D. C. Heath and Company.
25. Hirsch, E. D. (1996). The schools we need and why we don't have them. New York: Doubleday.
26. Hodson, D. (1988). Toward a philosophically more valid science curriculum. Science Education, 72, 19–40.
27. Horton, P. (1981). Integrated science: An introduction and bibliography. Melbourne, FL: Science Education Department, Florida Institute of Technology.
28. Hurd, P. D. (1973). Integrated science. The Science Teacher, 40, 18–19.
29. Hurd, P.D. (1991). Why we must transform science education. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 33–35.
30. Kahl, S., & Harms, N. (1981). Project synthesis: Purpose, organization, and procedures. In N. C. Harms, & R. E. Yager (Eds.), What research says to the science teacher, 3 (pp. 5–11). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
31. Kain, D. L. (1993). Cabbages and kings: Research directions in integrated/interdisciplinary curriculum. The Journal of Educational Thought, 27, 312–21.
32. Kelly, J. (1993). From knowing content to constructing knowledge: A trend analysis of secondary science education. Texas: University of North Texas.
33. Kilpatrick, W. H. (1951). Philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan.
34. Lawton, E. (1994). Integrating curriculum: A slow but positive process. Schools in the Middle, 4, 27–30.
35. Livermore, A. H. (1964). The process approach of the AAAS Commission on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2, 271–282.
36. Lockard, J. (1972). Eighth report of the international clearinghouse in science and mathematics curriculum development. College Park, MD: University of Maryland.
37. Lockard, J. (1974). Ninth report of the international clearinghouse in science and mathematics curriculum development. College Park, MD: University of Maryland.
38. Longstreet, W. S., & Shane, H. G. (1993). Curriculum for a new millennium. Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster.
39. Lopez, R. E. (1996). An interdisciplinary undergraduate space physics course. Journal of College Science Teaching, 15, 263–269.
40. McComas, W. F. (1993). STS education and the affective domain. In R. E. Yager (Ed.), What research says to the science teacher, 7: The science, technology, and society movement (pp. 161–168). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
41. McNeil, J. D. (1985). Curriculum: A comprehension introduction, (3rd ed.). New York: Little, Brown, & Company.
42. National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
43. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
44. Oliver, J. S., & Simpson, R. D. (1988). Influences of attitude toward science, achievement motivation, and science self concept of achievement on science: A longitudinal study. Science Education, 72, 143–155.
45. Phenix, P. H. (1964). Realms of meaning: A philosophy of the curriculum for general education. Ventura, CA: Irving S. Sato Printing Company.
46. Piaget, J. (1964). Development and learning. In R.E. Ripple & V. N. Rockcastle (Eds.), Piaget rediscovered: A report of the conference on cognitive skills and curriculum development. Ithaca, NY: Humanities Press.
47. Prescott, C., Rinard, B., Cockerill, J., & Baker, N. W. (1996). Science through workplace lenses. Educational Leadership, 53, 10–13.
48. Richardson, J., & Showalter, V. (1967). Effects of a unified science curriculum on high school graduates. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
49. Ross, A., & Olsen, K. (1993). The way we were… the way we can be: A vision for the middle school through integrated thematic instruction, 2nd ed. Kent, WA: Books for Educators.
50. Rutherford, J., & Gardner, M. (1969). Integrated science teaching. New trends in integrated science teaching, 1. Paris: UNESCO.
51. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1997). A splintered vision: Investigation of U. S. science and mathematics. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
52. Showalter, V. (1968). Effects of a unified science curriculum on high school graduates. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
53. Showalter, V. (1973a, Winter). Unified science terminology and variations. Prism II. Columbus, OH: CUSE.
54. Showalter, V. (1973b). The FUSE approach. The Science Teacher, 40, 25–27.
55. Showalter, V., Cox, D., & Holobinko, P. (1973, Autumn). Characteristics of the unified science unit. Prism II. Columbus, OH: CUSE.
56. Slesnick, I., & Showalter, V. (1961). Program development in unified science. The Science Teacher, 28, 54–55.
57. Thomson, B. (1975). FUSE and the center for unified science education. School Science and Mathematics, 75, 109–114.
58. Thorndike, E. (1913). Educational psychology: The psychology of learning. New York: W. H. Freeman.
59. Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers' sense of efficacy and beliefs about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 81–91.
60. Yager, R. E., & Lutz, M. V. (1994). Integrated science: The importance of “how” versus “what School Science and Mathematics, 94, 338–346.